I created the following class
#include "cliques.h"
#include "vector"
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
cliques::cliques(){
}
cliques::cliques(int i) {
clique.push_back(i);
clique_prob = 1;
mclique_prob = 1;
}
cliques::cliques(const cliques& orig) {
}
cliques::~cliques() {
}
void cliques::addvertex(int i) {
clique.push_back(i);
}
double cliques::getclique_prob() const {
return clique_prob;
}
double cliques::getMaxclique_prob() const {
return mclique_prob;
}
void cliques::showVertices() {
for (vector<int>::const_iterator i = clique.begin(); i !=clique.end(); ++i)
cout << *i << ' ';
cout << endl;
}
vector<int> cliques::returnVector() {
return clique;
}
void cliques::setclique_prob(double i) {
clique_prob = i;
}
void cliques::setMaxclique_prob(double i) {
mclique_prob = i;
}
Here's the header file
#include "vector"
#ifndef CLIQUES_H
#define CLIQUES_H
class cliques {
public:
void addvertex(int i);
cliques();
cliques(int i);
cliques(const cliques& orig);
virtual ~cliques();
double getclique_prob() const;
double getMaxclique_prob() const;
void showVertices();
std::vector<int> returnVector();
void setclique_prob(double i);
void setMaxclique_prob(double i);
private:
float clique_prob;
float mclique_prob;
std::vector <int> clique;
};
#endif /* CLIQUES_H */
I want to create a vector of these objects in order to implement a heap
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
cliques temp(1);
cliques temp1(2);
temp.setclique_prob(0.32);
temp.setclique_prob(0.852);
temp.showVertices();
temp1.showVertices();
vector <cliques> max_heap;
max_heap.push_back(temp);
max_heap.push_back(temp1);
double x =max_heap.front().getclique_prob();
cout<<"prob "<<x<<endl;
cliques y = max_heap.front();
y.showVertices();
//make_heap (max_heap.begin(),max_heap.end(),max_iterator());
//sort_heap (max_heap.begin(),max_heap.end(),max_iterator());
return 0;
}
For reasons unknown to me none of my class functions work properly after i create my vector, meaning that while the following function works as intended
temp.showVertices()
the next one doesn't,
y.showVertices()
You miss implementation for
cliques::cliques(const cliques& orig) {
}
STL vector uses copy constructor inside when you add values to it. As your cliques class does not allocate any memory, you can just remove the copy constructor from the code and compiler will generate one for you.
Related
class A
{
int id;
public:
A (int i) { id = i; }
void show() { cout << id << endl; }
};
int main()
{
A a[2];
a[0].show();
a[1].show();
return 0;
}
I get an error since there is no default constructor.However thats not my question.Is there a way that ı can send parameters when defining
A a[2];
A good practice is to declare your constructor explicit (unless it defines a conversion), especially if you have only one parameter. Than, you can create new objects and add them to your array, like this :
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
class A {
int id;
public:
explicit A (int i) { id = i; }
void show() { std::cout << id << std::endl; }
};
int main() {
A first(3);
A second(4);
A a[2] = {first, second};
a[0].show();
a[1].show();
return 0;
}
However, a better way is to use vectors (say in a week you want 4 objects in your array, or n object according to an input). You can do it like this:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
class A {
int id;
public:
explicit A (int i) { id = i; }
void show() { std::cout << id << std::endl; }
};
int main() {
std::vector<A> a;
int n = 0;
std::cin >> n;
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
A temp(i); // or any other number you want your objects to initiate them.
a.push_back(temp);
a[i].show();
}
return 0;
}
I would like to return an array to a pointer, in a virtual function that is a member of a derived class of a template class. In details, my classes definition is:
Sampler.h
#ifndef SAMPLER_H
#define SAMPLER_H
template <class T>
class Sampler
{
public:
virtual T getnumber()=0;
virtual T* simulation(int n)=0;
};
class UniformSampler:public Sampler<double>
{
public:
virtual double getnumber();
virtual double* simulation(int n);
UniformSampler(double a=0.0, double b=1.0);
private:
double low_bound;
double up_bound;
};
#endif
The class Sampler is a template class in order to be able to derive an other sampler with vectors later. The implementation is:
Sampler.cpp
#include "Sampler.h"
#include<iostream>
#include<cstdlib>
#include<cmath>
using namespace std;
//Uniform
UniformSampler::UniformSampler(double a, double b)
{
low_bound=a;
up_bound=b;
}
double UniformSampler::getnumber()
{
int myrand=rand();
while((myrand==0)||(myrand==RAND_MAX)){myrand = rand(); } //We want a number in (0, RAND_MAX).
double myuni = myrand/static_cast<double>(RAND_MAX); //Create a number in (0,1).
return low_bound + myuni*(up_bound-low_bound);
}
double* UniformSampler::simulation(int n){
double simulations[n];
for(int i=0; i<n; i++){
simulations[i] = this->getnumber();
}
return simulations;
}
My problem is that, when I try to call this program in the main(), it looks like the assignment of the pointer doesn't work. Here is my main.cpp:
#include <iostream>
#include <math.h>
#include <cstdlib>
#include <time.h>
using namespace std;
#include "Sampler.h"
int main(){
srand(time(0));
int n=10;
double *unif = new double[n];
UniformSampler uni;
unif = uni.simulation(n);
for ( int i = 0; i < n; i++ ) {
cout << "*(p + " << i << ") : ";
cout << *(unif + i) << endl;
}
delete[] unif;
return 0;
}
When I run it, it doesn't print any of the elements that unif points to. I don't understand what is wrong there.
UniformSampler::simulation is twice wrong:
double simulations[n]; uses VLA extension, so not C++ standard compliant.
you return pointer on local variable, so dangling pointer.
Solution: use std::vector instead.
#include <vector>
template <class T>
class Sampler
{
public:
virtual ~Sampler() = default;
virtual T getnumber() = 0;
virtual std::vector<T> simulation(int n) = 0;
};
class UniformSampler:public Sampler<double>
{
public:
explicit UniformSampler(double a=0.0, double b=1.0);
double getnumber() overrid;
std::vector<double> simulation(int n) override
{
std::vector<double> res(n);
for (auto& val : res){
res = getnumber();
}
return res;
}
private:
double low_bound;
double up_bound;
};
int main(){
srand(time(0));
constexpr int n = 10;
UniformSampler uni;
auto unif = uni.simulation(n);
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++ ) {
std::cout << "p[" << i << "]: " << unif[i] << endl;
}
}
In the class constructor, I am initializing other objects and pushing these objects to my class vector member. From what I understand, the vector create a copy of the object and stores it so that it doesn't go out of scope. However, when verifying the objects in another class function, they are not initialized anymore. Here's a example code to explain the behaviour:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
class Square {
private:
int size_ = 0;
int colour_ = 0;
public:
Square(){
size_ = 0;
colour_ = 0;
}
void init(int size, int colour) {
size_ = size;
colour_ = colour;
}
int get_size() { return size_; }
};
class SetSquares {
private:
std::vector<Square> squares_;
int number_;
public:
SetSquares(): number_(0) {}
void init(int num) {
number_ = num;
squares_.clear();
squares_.resize(num);
for (int i=0; i < num; i++) {
Square square;
square.init(i, i);
squares_.push_back(square);
}
}
void sample(int i) {
if (i >= number_) { return; }
std::cout << "Square size is: " << squares_[i].get_size() << std::endl;
}
};
int main()
{
SetSquares set_of_squares;
set_of_squares.init(7);
set_of_squares.sample(4);
return 0;
}
resize(n) will create n default constructed elements in a vector and push_back will append new elements after those n elements. Use reserve and push_back or resize and index operator as suggested in comment.
Say I have a simple vector class, vec:
#include <iostream>
#include <stdlib.h>
class vec {
public:
vec() {}
// Constructor.
vec(int n) {
len = n;
data = new double[len];
}
// Destructor.
~vec() { delete [] data; }
// Accessor.
double & operator[](int i) const {
check_index(i);
return data[i];
}
// Other methods...
// ....
protected:
int len;
double * data;
void check_index(int i) const {
if(i < 0 || i >= len) {
std::cerr << "Bad access.\n";
exit(1);
}
}
};
Now suppose I have a special type of vector with sparse structure, e.g., where every even-index is zero. Call this oddvec. Instances of oddvec should be declared just as with the vec class, but underneath, the memory use should be efficient since only half the data is non-zero.
The accessor for the oddvec class should return 0 if the index is even, and return the odd-index element (stored sequentially) otherwise. There a couple problems with this:
The double & return type is violated if the index is even, since the constant value, 0, is returned.
It's not clear to me how to handle the situation when an even index element is used as an lvalue. E.g., v[0] = 3.0 should not be allowed in the oddvec class, but is perfectly acceptable in the vector class. We can't simply throw an error when even indexes are used, because even indexes are fine as long as the intention is as an rvalue.
How do I design the accessor function for the oddvec class, while both keeping the memory storage efficient and inheriting all the methods from the parent?
Non-working example of oddvec:
class oddvec : public vec {
public:
// Constructor.
oddvec(int n) {
len = n;
data = new double[len/2];
}
// Accessor (doesn't work!)
double & operator[](int i) const {
check_index(i);
if (i%2 == 0)
return 0;
else
return data[(i-1)/2];
}
};
Upon compilation:
main.cpp: In member function ‘double& oddvec::operator[](int) const’:
main.cpp:49:20: error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type ‘double&’ from an rvalue of type ‘double’
return 0;
Working example using proxy classes:
I have implemented a proxy class as suggested in the answer below.
proxies.h
#ifndef PROXIES_H
#define PROXIES_H
#include <iostream>
#include <stdlib.h>
class proxy {
public:
proxy(int i, double v, double * d) {
index = i;
value = v;
data = d;
}
void operator=(double rhs) {
data[index] = rhs;
}
friend std::ostream & operator<<(std::ostream & outs, const proxy & p) {
outs << p.value;
return outs;
}
protected:
int index;
double value;
double * data;
};
class oddproxy : public proxy {
public:
oddproxy(int i, int v, double * d) : proxy(i, v, d) {}
void operator=(double rhs) {
if (index%2 == 0) {
std::cerr << "Even entries of oddvec are not assignable.\n";
exit(1);
}
data[index/2] = rhs;
}
};
#endif
vectors.h
#ifndef VECTORS_H
#define VECTORS_H
#include "proxies.h"
class vec {
public:
vec() {}
// Constructor.
vec(int n) {
len = n;
data = new double[len];
}
// Destructor.
~vec() { delete [] data; }
// Accessor.
proxy operator[](int i) const {
check_index(i);
return proxy(i, data[i], data);
}
inline int length() const { return len; }
// Other methods...
// ....
protected:
int len;
double * data;
void check_index(int i) const {
if(i < 0 || i >= len) {
std::cerr << "Bad access.\n";
exit(1);
}
}
};
class oddvec : public vec {
public:
// Constructor.
oddvec(int n) {
len = n;
data = new double[len/2];
}
// Accessor.
oddproxy operator[](int i) const {
check_index(i);
return oddproxy(i, (i%2 == 0) ? 0 : data[i/2], data);
}
};
#endif
main.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include "vectors.h"
int main () {
int N = 5;
vec V(N);
oddvec O(N);
for(int i=0; i < V.length(); i++) {
V[i] = i;
if(i%2 != 0) {
O[i] = i;
}
}
for(int i=0; i < O.length(); i++) {
std::cout << "V[" << i << "]=" << V[i] << ", "
<< "O[" << i << "]=" << O[i] << "\n";
}
O[0] = 13;
return 0;
}
output
V[0]=0, O[0]=0
V[1]=1, O[1]=1
V[2]=2, O[2]=0
V[3]=3, O[3]=3
V[4]=4, O[4]=0
Even entries of oddvec are not assignable.
You can use proxy object to do this.
simple sample code:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
class very_odd_vector{
public:
class only_odd_proxy;
friend class only_odd_proxy;
only_odd_proxy operator [](int index);
int operator [](int index)const{return index%2==0?0:content[index/2];}
unsigned int size()const{return content.size()*2;}
private:
vector<int> content{1,3,5,7,9};
};
class very_odd_vector::only_odd_proxy{
public:
only_odd_proxy(very_odd_vector& vec,int index):vec(vec),index(index){}
operator int(){return index%2==0 ? 0 : vec.content[index/2];}
only_odd_proxy& operator =(int value){
if(index%2==0)
cout << "BAD OPERATION";//any error you want
else
vec.content[index/2] = value;
return *this;
}
private:
very_odd_vector& vec;
int index;
};
auto very_odd_vector::operator [](int index)->only_odd_proxy{return only_odd_proxy(*this,index);}
int main(){
very_odd_vector v;
cout << "reading value\n";
for(int i=0;i<v.size();++i)
cout << v[i] <<'\n';
cout << "writting value\n";
for(int i=0;i<v.size();++i){
cout << i << ':';
v[i]=10;
cout << '\n';
}
cout << "reading value\n";
for(int i=0;i<v.size();++i)
cout << v[i] <<'\n';
}
Edit for updated part of question :
I think this class will fit your need more.
//Both base and inherit class return this class
class maybe_readonly_proxy {
public:
maybe_readonly_proxy(double* data, bool readonly):readonly(readonly),data(data){}
maybe_readonly_proxy& operator=(double rhs) {
if(readonly){/*whatever error*/}
else {*data = rhs;}
return *this;
}
operator double()const{return *data;}
private:
bool readonly;
double * data;
};
You may need a variable to contain readonly (0 in this case) value, or modify the operator double() the check readonly state
Or just implement get and set method separately and do not use this proxy may be another choice.
http://ideone.com/1ohrsO
The push_back called inside the constructor of static_constructor, is not reflected. Why?
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include<memory>
#include<string>
using namespace std;
class has_static_constructor
{
public:
friend class static_constructor;
static vector<int> v;
class static_constructor
{
public:
vector<int> * upt; //&v;
static_constructor()
{
cout<<"inside static_constructor";
upt = &has_static_constructor::v;
has_static_constructor::v.push_back(1);
has_static_constructor::v.push_back(20);
}
} ;
static std::unique_ptr<has_static_constructor::static_constructor> upt ;
};
unique_ptr<has_static_constructor::static_constructor> has_static_constructor::upt(new has_static_constructor::static_constructor());
vector< int > has_static_constructor::v(2,100);
int main() {
// your code goes here
for (std::vector<int>::const_iterator i = has_static_constructor::v.begin(); i != has_static_constructor::v.end(); ++i)
{ std::cout << *i << ' ';
cout<<"\n I was here\n";
}
return 0;
}
Output:
inside static_constructor100
I was here
100
I was here
static_constructor() is called before has_static_constructor::v initialization.
Move
unique_ptr<has_static_constructor::static_constructor> has_static_constructor::upt(new has_static_constructor::static_constructor());
after
vector< int > has_static_constructor::v(2,100);
to have expected behaviour.
But better avoid those global entirely.
You might want to have a look at this way of ordering the code. It removes all initialisation-order dependencies, and in my view neatly separates the public interface from the internal implementation of the static data.
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
class has_static_constructor
{
// note - all private
struct static_data {
static_data()
: _v(2, 100)
{
_v.push_back(1);
_v.push_back(20);
}
std::vector<int> _v;
};
static static_data& statics() {
static static_data sd;
return sd;
}
// public interface
public:
static std::vector<int>& v() { return statics()._v; }
};
auto main() -> int
{
for (const auto& i : has_static_constructor::v())
{
std::cout << i << std::endl;
}
return 0;
}
expected output:
100
100
1
20