VS12 cmath polluting global namespace [duplicate] - c++

I am developing a project which works with multiple arithmetic types. So I made a header, where the minimal requirements for a user defined arithmetic type are defined:
user_defined_arithmetic.h :
typedef double ArithmeticF; // The user chooses what type he
// wants to use to represent a real number
namespace arithmetic // and defines the functions related to that type
{
const ArithmeticF sin(const ArithmeticF& x);
const ArithmeticF cos(const ArithmeticF& x);
const ArithmeticF tan(const ArithmeticF& x);
...
}
What is troubling me is that when I use code like this:
#include "user_defined_arithmetic.h"
void some_function()
{
using namespace arithmetic;
ArithmeticF lala(3);
sin(lala);
}
I get a compiler error:
error: call of overloaded 'sin(ArithmeticF&)' is ambiguous
candidates are:
double sin(double)
const ArithmeticF arithmetic::sin(const ArithmeticF&)
I have never used the <math.h> header, only the <cmath>. I have never used the using namespace std in a header file.
I am using gcc 4.6.*. I checked what is the header containing the ambiguous declaration and it turns out to be:
mathcalls.h :
Prototype declarations for math functions; helper file for <math.h>.
...
I know, that <cmath> includes <math.h>, but it should shield the declarations by the std namespace. I dig into the <cmath> header and find:
cmath.h :
...
#include <math.h>
...
// Get rid of those macros defined in <math.h> in lieu of real functions.
#undef abs
#undef div
#undef acos
...
namespace std _GLIBCXX_VISIBILITY(default)
{
...
So the namespace std begins after the #include <math.h>. Is there something wrong here, or did I misunderstand something?

Implementations of the C++ standard library are permitted to declare C library functions in the global namespace as well as in std. Some would call this a mistake, since (as you've found) the namespace pollution can cause conflicts with your own names. However, that's the way it is, so we must live with it. You'll just have to qualify your name as arithmetic::sin.
In the words of the standard (C++11 17.6.1.2/4):
In the C++ standard library, however, the declarations (except for
names which are defined as macros in C) are within namespace scope (3.3.6) of the namespace std. It is
unspecified whether these names are first declared within the global namespace scope and are then injected
into namespace std by explicit using-declarations (7.3.3).

If you really wanted to, you could always write a little wrapper around cmath, along the lines of:
//stdmath.cpp
#include <cmath>
namespace stdmath
{
double sin(double x)
{
return std::sin(x);
}
}
//stdmath.hpp
#ifndef STDMATH_HPP
#define STDMATH_HPP
namespace stdmath {
double sin(double);
}
#endif
//uses_stdmath.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include "stdmath.hpp"
double sin(double x)
{
return 1.0;
}
int main()
{
std::cout << stdmath::sin(1) << std::endl;
std::cout << sin(1) << std::endl;
}
I suppose there could be some overhead from the additional function call, depending on how clever the compiler is.

This is just a humble attempt to start solving this problem. (Suggestions are welcomed.)
I have been dealing with this problem a long time. A case were the problem is very obvious is this case:
#include<cmath>
#include<iostream>
namespace mylib{
std::string exp(double x){return "mylib::exp";}
}
int main(){
std::cout << std::exp(1.) << std::endl; // works
std::cout << mylib::exp(1.) << std::endl; // works
using namespace mylib;
std::cout << exp(1.) << std::endl; //doesn't works!, "ambiguous" call
return 0;
}
This is in my opinion is an annoying bug or at the least an very unfortunate situation. (At least in GCC, and clang --using GCC library-- in Linux.)
Lately I gave it another shot to the problem. By looking at the cmath (of GCC) it seems that the header is there simply to overload the C-functions and screws up the namespace in the process.
namespace std{
#include<math.h>
}
//instead of #include<cmath>
With it this works
using namespace mylib;
std::cout << exp(1.) << std::endl; //now works.
I am almost sure that this is not exactly equivalent to #include<cmath> but most functions seem to work.
Worst of all is that eventually some dependence library will eventually will #inclulde<cmath>. For that I couldn't find a solution yet.
NOTE: Needless to say this doesn't work at all
namespace std{
#include<cmath> // compile errors
}

Related

No ambiguous reference error even after using namespace directive

The following code generates call of overloaded ‘bar()’ is ambiguous error which it should be as I have a function bar in both global and foo namespace and I have called using namespace foo directive.
namespace foo {
void bar() {}
}
void bar() {}
using namespace foo;
int main() {
bar();
}
I was expecting the same error with the following code too:
#include <cstdlib>
#include <iostream>
int abs(int n) {
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
using namespace std;
int main() {
int k;
cin >> k;
cout << abs(k) << endl;
}
I have defined a function int abs(int n) like the one present in cstlib and I have called using namespace std directive. So there should have been an error like the first example. But there is none.
My question is how the compiler is resolving this ambiguity? Which function will be called in such cases, mine or std's one? Is there any UB involved here?
Update: From comments and answers it seems that different compilers are behaving differently. So is this behavior undefined or implementation defined?
I have tested it with g++ 4.8.4 on Ubuntu 14.04 with -std=c++11 flag.
[Please note that I do understand that using namespace std is bad and my abs function is no better or even worse than std one. My question is different.]
In the C++ standard section 17.6.1 Library contents and organization, we read in 17.6.1.2:
Except as noted in Clauses 18 through 30 and Annex D, the contents of
each header cname shall be the same as that of the corresponding
header name.h , as specified in the C standard library (1.2) or the C
Unicode TR, as appropriate, as if by inclusion. In the C
++ standard library, however, the declarations (except for names which are defined as macros in C) are within namespace scope (3.3.6) of the
namespace std. It is unspecified whether these names are first
declared within the global namespace scope and are then injected into
namespace std by explicit using-declarations (7.3.3).
emphasis added
Additionally, in 17.6.4.3.2 External linkage we read
Each name from the Standard C library declared with external linkage
is reserved to the implementation for use as a name with extern "C"
linkage, both in namespace std and in the global namespace
In plain English from this section and similar, C standard library names are reserved, but C standard library names are only in the global namespace scope.
What GLIBCXX is doing here is perfectly valid; it's declaring an abs in the global namespace scope and injecting it into std using using-declarations.
Indeed, in the standard library that my system / g++ 4.8.5 and 6.3.0 use (6.3.0 I checked on coliru), <cstdlib> looks something like this:
// <stdlib.h>:
extern int abs (int __x) __THROW __attribute__ ((__const__)) __wur;
// <cstdlib>
#include <stdlib.h>
namespace std
{
using ::abs;
}
It's that using ::abs which makes std::abs call your function.
You violate the ODR because the GLIBC is a shared library and it also provides an implementation for int abs(int).
That you don't get a "multiple definition of abs(int)" linker error is arguably a bug in the compilers; it would be nice if they warned as about this undefined behavior.
This can be reproduced with this example:
main.cpp
#include <iostream>
int myabs(int);
namespace foo {
int myabs(int n) {
return ::myabs(n);
}
}
int myabs(int n) {
std::cout << "myabs inside main.cpp\n";
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
using namespace foo;
int main() {
int k = -1;
std::cout << foo::myabs(k) << std::endl;
}
myabs.cpp
#include <iostream>
int myabs(int n) {
std::cout << "myabs inside myabs.cpp\n";
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
Then on the commandline:
g++ -fPIC -c myabs.cpp
g++ -shared myabs.o -o libmyabs.so
g++ -L. main.cpp -lmyabs
Running ./a.out calls the myabs defined inside main.cpp, whereas if you comment out the myabs in main.cpp, it calls the one from myabs.cpp
How to avoid this problem
If you avoid declaring functions in the global namespace, you should mostly avoid this problem.
For your example, if we instead write:
#include <cstdlib>
#include <iostream>
namespace {
int abs(int n) {
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
}
using namespace std;
int main() {
int k;
cin >> k;
cout << abs(k) << endl;
}
We get the expected error warning about the call being ambiguous. However, be warned that this doesn't solve the problem if the standard library declares abs in the global namespace:
int main() {
int k;
cin >> k;
cout << ::abs(k) << endl;
}
That seems to just call the standard library version. Naturally, this problem can be avoided by avoiding using namespace std
The problem is that <cstdlib> is really complicated due to the interactions between the C headers and the C++ headers. In libstdc++, it's not implemented as:
namespace std {
int abs(int );
}
If that were the case, then your sample program with std::abs would match your expectation about your sample program with foo::bar, for precisely the same reasons. But instead, it's declared as something like:
// from <stdlib.h>
extern int abs(int );
// from <cstdlib>
#include <stdlib.h>
namespace std {
using ::abs;
}
When you declared and defined your own ::abs(int ), that is simply a redeclaration of the previously declared int ::abs(int ). You're not overloading anything - there is just one int ::abs(int) in this translation unit! You could see that if you tried to declare something like long abs(int ) - you'd get an error about redeclaration with a different return type.
This works because ::abs in the C header isn't defined (otherwise you'd get a compile error on a redefinition) - you bring that definition in through the shared library. And so you end up with an ODR violation because you have your definition in the TU and the shared library definition in GLIBC, and hence, undefined behavior. I'm not sure why the linker doesn't catch it.
If abs function is declared in following way:
void abs(int n) {
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
(return type is changed from int to void)
this will raise error: ambiguating new declaration of 'void abs(int)'
Because in stdlib it it declared as int abs(int n) but we're defining it now with another return type.
So why it is not complaining when I defining it with correct return type?
First of all, implementation of int abs(int k) resides in compiled form (standard library) not in source form. So it is not possible to to tell (before linking) if any int abs(int k) is already defined or not. So compiler is happy with declaration in cstdlib and definition in our provided source. And when it starts linking it only search for function's which is declared but not defined yet(so that it can copy the definition (assumed linking against a static library)). So linker won't search for another definition of int abs(int k). Finally our given definition is included in resulting binary.
I've noticed the following inside <cstdlib>:
#ifndef __CORRECT_ISO_CPP_STDLIB_H_PROTO
inline long
abs(long __i) { return __builtin_labs(__i); }
//...
When I try your example using long,
#include <cstdlib>
#include <iostream>
long abs(long n) {
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
using namespace std;
int main() {
long k;
cin >> k;
cout << abs(k) << endl;
}
I get the expected error:
error: call of overloaded 'abs(long int&)' is ambiguous
Maybe your implementation is doing something similar.
Let's modify this code to this:
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdlib>
int abs(int n) {
std::cout << "default abs\n";
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
//using namespace std;
int main() {
int k;
std::cin >> k;
std::cout << std::abs(k) << std::endl;
}
It STILL will call your abs. Strange , huh? Ok, actually there is no int abs(int) function in std namespace. There is no ambiguous call here, depending on used platform, because actual abs defined as equal to this:
std::intmax_t abs( std::intmax_t n );
But actual implementation may vary, depending on a number of factors.
What you've did is that you had either had overload the function or a template. As long as you won't hit the exact definition in header file, your function will be used if it matches better to arguments. It may be tried as candidate by std templates instead of std::abs() function if std namespace is used globally. That's one of caveats behind using namespace std in global scope.
in fact, on my system std::abs defined as an abs from global scope:
Of course, you have a function from global scope with such prototype, defined by yourself, so std::abs call in my case is equal to ::abs call.
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdlib>
int abs( long n ) {
std::cout << "default abs\n";
return n > 0 ? n : -n;
}
//using namespace std;
int main() {
int k;
std::cin >> k;
std::cout << std::abs(k) << std::endl;
}
Now it uses standard library function and outputs absolute value of k.
Let's see what cstdlib header contains in particular case:
_STD_BEGIN
using _CSTD size_t; using _CSTD div_t; using _CSTD ldiv_t;
using _CSTD abort; using _CSTD abs; using _CSTD atexit;
// and so on..
_STD_END
_STD_BEGIN defined as
#define _STD_BEGIN namespace std {
Effectively we have
namespace std {
using ::abs;
}
This way anything that got identifier abs in global scope becomes std::abs This got force of forward declaration, so abs() defined after this definition is the subject. Because language syntax allows that, redefining library identifiers in global scope might result in ill-formed program or to UB, which in this case comes down to which declarations are active in header.
The C++ standard library reserves the following kinds of names:
macros
global names
names with external linkage
If a program declares or defines a name in a context where it is
reserved, other than as explicitly allowed by this Clause, its
behavior is undefined.

Why are some functions in <cmath> not in the std namespace?

I am developing a project which works with multiple arithmetic types. So I made a header, where the minimal requirements for a user defined arithmetic type are defined:
user_defined_arithmetic.h :
typedef double ArithmeticF; // The user chooses what type he
// wants to use to represent a real number
namespace arithmetic // and defines the functions related to that type
{
const ArithmeticF sin(const ArithmeticF& x);
const ArithmeticF cos(const ArithmeticF& x);
const ArithmeticF tan(const ArithmeticF& x);
...
}
What is troubling me is that when I use code like this:
#include "user_defined_arithmetic.h"
void some_function()
{
using namespace arithmetic;
ArithmeticF lala(3);
sin(lala);
}
I get a compiler error:
error: call of overloaded 'sin(ArithmeticF&)' is ambiguous
candidates are:
double sin(double)
const ArithmeticF arithmetic::sin(const ArithmeticF&)
I have never used the <math.h> header, only the <cmath>. I have never used the using namespace std in a header file.
I am using gcc 4.6.*. I checked what is the header containing the ambiguous declaration and it turns out to be:
mathcalls.h :
Prototype declarations for math functions; helper file for <math.h>.
...
I know, that <cmath> includes <math.h>, but it should shield the declarations by the std namespace. I dig into the <cmath> header and find:
cmath.h :
...
#include <math.h>
...
// Get rid of those macros defined in <math.h> in lieu of real functions.
#undef abs
#undef div
#undef acos
...
namespace std _GLIBCXX_VISIBILITY(default)
{
...
So the namespace std begins after the #include <math.h>. Is there something wrong here, or did I misunderstand something?
Implementations of the C++ standard library are permitted to declare C library functions in the global namespace as well as in std. Some would call this a mistake, since (as you've found) the namespace pollution can cause conflicts with your own names. However, that's the way it is, so we must live with it. You'll just have to qualify your name as arithmetic::sin.
In the words of the standard (C++11 17.6.1.2/4):
In the C++ standard library, however, the declarations (except for
names which are defined as macros in C) are within namespace scope (3.3.6) of the namespace std. It is
unspecified whether these names are first declared within the global namespace scope and are then injected
into namespace std by explicit using-declarations (7.3.3).
If you really wanted to, you could always write a little wrapper around cmath, along the lines of:
//stdmath.cpp
#include <cmath>
namespace stdmath
{
double sin(double x)
{
return std::sin(x);
}
}
//stdmath.hpp
#ifndef STDMATH_HPP
#define STDMATH_HPP
namespace stdmath {
double sin(double);
}
#endif
//uses_stdmath.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include "stdmath.hpp"
double sin(double x)
{
return 1.0;
}
int main()
{
std::cout << stdmath::sin(1) << std::endl;
std::cout << sin(1) << std::endl;
}
I suppose there could be some overhead from the additional function call, depending on how clever the compiler is.
This is just a humble attempt to start solving this problem. (Suggestions are welcomed.)
I have been dealing with this problem a long time. A case were the problem is very obvious is this case:
#include<cmath>
#include<iostream>
namespace mylib{
std::string exp(double x){return "mylib::exp";}
}
int main(){
std::cout << std::exp(1.) << std::endl; // works
std::cout << mylib::exp(1.) << std::endl; // works
using namespace mylib;
std::cout << exp(1.) << std::endl; //doesn't works!, "ambiguous" call
return 0;
}
This is in my opinion is an annoying bug or at the least an very unfortunate situation. (At least in GCC, and clang --using GCC library-- in Linux.)
Lately I gave it another shot to the problem. By looking at the cmath (of GCC) it seems that the header is there simply to overload the C-functions and screws up the namespace in the process.
namespace std{
#include<math.h>
}
//instead of #include<cmath>
With it this works
using namespace mylib;
std::cout << exp(1.) << std::endl; //now works.
I am almost sure that this is not exactly equivalent to #include<cmath> but most functions seem to work.
Worst of all is that eventually some dependence library will eventually will #inclulde<cmath>. For that I couldn't find a solution yet.
NOTE: Needless to say this doesn't work at all
namespace std{
#include<cmath> // compile errors
}

Using Namespace std

I am taking a programming class in school and I wanted to start doing some c++ programming out of class. My school using Microsoft Visual C++ 6.0 (which is from 1998) so it still uses <iostream.h> rather than <iostream> and using namespace std. When I started working, I couldn't figure out how and when to use using namespace std and when to just use things like std::cout<<"Hello World!"<<'\n'; (for example) as well as it's limits and other uses for the namespace keyword. In particular, if I want to make a program with iostream and iomanip, do I have to state "using namespace std" twice, or is there something different that I would have to use as well, or can I just do the same thing as I did with iostream? I tried googling it but I didn't really understand anything. Thanks in advance for the help.
Ok, handful of things there, but it is manageable.
First off, the difference between:
using namespace std;
...
cout << "Something" << endl;
And using
std::cout << "Something" << std::endl;
Is simply a matter of scope. Scope is just a fancy way of saying how the compiler recognizes names of variables and functions, among other things. A namespace does nothing more than add an extra layer of scope onto all variables within that namespace. When you type using namespace std, you are taking everything inside of the namespace std and moving it to the global scope, so that you can use the shorter cout instead of the more fully-qualified std::cout.
One thing to understand about namespaces is that they stretch across files. Both <iostream> and <iomanip> use the namespace std. Therefore, if you include both, then the declaration of using namespace std will operate on both files, and all symbols in both files will be moved to the global scope of your program (or a function's scope, if you used it inside a function).
There are going to be people who tell you "don't use using namespace std!!!!", but they rarely tell you why. Lets say that I have the following program, where all I am trying to do is define two integers and print them out:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
int cout = 0;
int endl = 1;
cout << cout << endl << endl; // The compiler WILL freak out at this :)
return 0;
}
When I use using namespace std, I am opening the door for naming collisions. If I (by random chance), have named a variable to be the same thing as what was defined in a header, then your program will break, and you will have a tough time figuring out why.
I can write the same program as before (but get it to work) by not using the statement using namespace std:
#include <iostream>
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
int cout = 0;
int endl = 1;
std::cout << cout << endl << std::endl; // Compiler is happy, so I'm happy :)
return 0;
}
Hopefully this has clarified a few things.
If you use the header names without the .h, then the stuff declared/defined in it will be in the std namespace. You only have to use using namespace std; once in the scope where you want stuff imported in order to get everything; more than one using namespace std; doesn't help anything.
I'd recommend against using namespace std; in general, though. I prefer to say, for example, using std::cout; instead, in order to keep names in std from conflicting with mine.
For example:
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
int main()
{
using namespace std;
int left = 1, right = 2;
cout << left << " to " << right << "\n";
}
may cause mysterious issues, because left and right exist in the std namespace (as IO manipulators), and they get imported if you lazily say using namespace std;. If you meant to actually use the IO manipulators rather than output the variables, you may be a bit disappointed. But the intent isn't obvious either way. Maybe you just forgot you have ints named left and right.
Instead, if you say
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
int main()
{
using std::cout;
int left = 1, right = 2;
cout << left << " to " << right << "\n";
}
or
#include <iostream>
#include <iomanip>
int main()
{
int left = 1, right = 2;
std::cout << left << " to " << right << "\n";
}
everything works as expected. Plus, you get to see what you're actually using (which, in this case, includes nothing from <iomanip>), so it's easier to keep your includes trimmed down to just what you need.
Here is a good link that describes namespaces and how they work.
Both methods are correct, that is, you can either introduce a namespace with the "using" statement or you can qualify all the members of the namespace. Its a matter of coding style. I prefer qualifying with namespaces because it makes it clear to the reader in which namespace the function / class is defined.
Also, you do not have to introduce a namespace twice if you are including multiple files. One using statement is enough.
Good question, Ryan. What using namespace does is importing all symbols from a given namespace (scope) into the scope where it was used. For example, you can do the following:
namespace A {
struct foo {};
}
namespace B {
using namespace A;
struct bar : foo {};
}
In the above examples, all symbols in namespace A become visible in namespace B, like they were declared there.
This import has affect only for a given translation unit. So, for example, when in your implementation file (i.e. .cpp) you do using namespace std;, you basically import all symbols from std namespace into a global scope.
You can also import certain symbols rather than everything, for example:
using std::cout;
using std::endl;
You can do that in global scope, namespace scope or function scope, like this:
int main ()
{
using namespace std;
}
It is up to a programmer to decide when to use fully qualified names and when to use using keyword. Usually, it is a very bad taste to put using into a header files. Professional C++ programmers almost never do that, unless that is necessary to work around some issue or they are 100% sure it will not mess up type resolution for whoever use that header.
Inside the source file, however (nobody includes source files), it is OK to do any sort of using statements as long as there are no conflicting names in different namespaces. It is only a matter of taste. For example, if there are tons of symbols from different namespaces being used all over the code, I'd prefer at least some hints as for where they are actully declared. But everyone is familiar with STL, so using namespace std; should never do any harm.
There also could be some long namespaces, and namespace aliasing comes handy in those cases. For example, there is a Boost.Filesystem library that puts all of its symbols in boost::filesystem namespace. Using that namespace would be too much, so people usually do something like this:
namespace fs = boost::filesystem;
fs::foo ();
fs::bar ();
Also, it is almost OK to use namespace aliasing in headers, like this:
namespace MyLib {
namespace fs = boost::filesystem;
}
.. and benefit from less typing. What happens is that users that will use this header, will not import the whole filesystem library by saying using namespace MyLib;. But then, they will import "fs" namespace from your library that could conflict with something else. So it is better not to do it, but if you want it too badly, it is better than saying using namespace boost::filesystem there.
So getting back to your question. If you write a library using C++ I/O streams, it is better not to have any using statements in headers, and I'd go with using namespace std; in every cpp file. For example:
somefile.hpp:
namespace mylib {
class myfile : public std::fstream {
public:
myfile (const char *path);
// ...
};
}
somefile.cpp:
#include "somefile.hpp"
using namespace std;
using namespace mylib;
myfile::myfile (const char *path) : fstream (path)
{
// ...
}
Specific to using namespace std
You really shouldn't ever use it in a header file. By doing so, you've imported the entire 'std' into the global namespace for anyone who includes your header file, or for anyone else that includes a file that includes your file.
Using it inside a .cpp file, that's personal preference. I typically do not import the entire std into the global namespace, but there doesn't appear to be any harm in doing it yourself, to save a bit of typing.

What is the need to specify "std" prefix?

I'm a beginner in programming and I often see many programs using the prefix std if they are using any std functions like std::cout, std::cin, etc. I was wondering what is it's purpose ? Is it just a way of good programming or is there more to it ? Does it make any difference for the compiler or is it readability or what ? Thanks.
The STL types and functions are defined in the namespace named std. The std:: prefix is used to use the types without fully including the std namespace.
Option 1 (use the prefix)
#include <iostream>
void Example() {
std::cout << "Hello World" << std::endl;
}
Option #2 (use the namespace)
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
void Example() {
cout << "Hello World" << endl;
}
Option #3 (use types individually)
#include <iostream>
using std::cout;
using std::endl;
void Example() {
cout << "Hello World" << endl;
}
Note: There are other implications to including an entire C++ namespace (option #2) other than not having to prefix every type / method with std:: (especially if done within a header) file. Many C++ programmers avoid this practice and prefer #1 or #3.
C++ has a concept of namespaces.
namespace foo {
int bar();
}
namespace baz {
int bar();
}
These two functions can coexist without conflict, since they're in different namespaces.
Most of the standard library functions and classes live in the "std" namespace. To access e.g. cout, you need to do one of the following, in order of preference:
std::cout << 1;
using std::cout; cout << 1;
using namespace std; cout << 1;
The reason you should avoid using is demonstrated with the above foo and baz namespaces. If you had using namespace foo; using namespace baz; any attempt to call bar() would be ambiguous. Using the namespace prefix is explicit and exact, and a good habit.
Nobody mentioned in their answer that a using namespace foo statement can be put inside a function body, thereby reducing namespace contamination in other scopes.
For example:
// This scope not affected by using namespace statement below.
void printRecord(...)
{
using namespace std;
// Frequent use of std::cout, io manipulators, etc...
// Constantly prefixing with std:: would be tedious here.
}
class Foo
{
// This scope not affected by using namespace statement above.
};
int main()
{
// This scope not affected either.
}
You can even put a using namespace foo statement inside a local scope (pair of curly braces).
It's a C++ feature called namespaces:
namespace foo {
void a();
}
// ...
foo::a();
// or:
using namespace foo;
a(); // only works if there is only one definition of `a` in both `foo` and global scope!
The advantage is, that there may be multiple functions named a - as long as they are within different namespaces, they can be used unambiguously (i.e. foo::a(), another_namespace::a()). The whole C++ standard library resides in std for this purpose.
Use using namespace std; to avoid the prefix if you can stand the disadvantages (name clashes, less clear where a function belongs to, ...).
It's short for the standard namespace.
You could use:
using namespace std
if you don't want to keep using std::cout and just use cout

What requires me to declare "using namespace std;"?

This question may be a duplicate, but I can't find a good answer. Short and simple, what requires me to declare
using namespace std;
in C++ programs?
Since the C++ standard has been accepted, practically all of the standard library is inside the std namespace. So if you don't want to qualify all standard library calls with std::, you need to add the using directive.
However,
using namespace std;
is considered a bad practice because you are practically importing the whole standard namespace, thus opening up a lot of possibilities for name clashes. It is better to import only the stuff you are actually using in your code, like
using std::string;
Nothing does, it's a shorthand to avoid prefixing everything in that namespace with std::
Technically, you might be required to use using (for whole namespaces or individual names) to be able to use Argument Dependent Lookup.
Consider the two following functions that use swap().
#include <iostream>
#include <algorithm>
namespace zzz
{
struct X {};
void swap(zzz::X&, zzz::X&)
{
std::cout << "Swapping X\n";
}
}
template <class T>
void dumb_swap(T& a, T& b)
{
std::cout << "dumb_swap\n";
std::swap(a, b);
}
template <class T>
void smart_swap(T& a, T& b)
{
std::cout << "smart_swap\n";
using std::swap;
swap(a, b);
}
int main()
{
zzz::X a, b;
dumb_swap(a, b);
smart_swap(a, b);
int i, j;
dumb_swap(i, j);
smart_swap(i, j);
}
dumb_swap always calls std::swap - even though we'd rather prefer using zzz::swap for zzz::X objects.
smart_swap makes std::swap visible as a fall-back choice (e.g when called with ints), but since it doesn't fully qualify the name, zzz::swap will be used through ADL for zzz::X.
Subjectively, what forces me to use using namespace std; is writing code that uses all kinds of standard function objects, etc.
//copy numbers larger than 1 from stdin to stdout
remove_copy_if(
std::istream_iterator<int>(std::cin), std::istream_iterator<int>(),
std::ostream_iterator<int>(std::cout, "\n"),
std::bind2nd(std::less_equal<int>(), 0)
);
IMO, in code like this std:: just makes for line noise.
I wouldn't find using namespace std; a heinous crime in such cases, if it is used in the implementation file (but it can be even restricted to function scope, as in the swap example).
Definitely don't put the using statement in the header files. The reason is that this pollutes the namespace for other headers, which might be included after the offending one, potentially leading to errors in other headers which might not be under your control. (It also adds the surprise factor: people including the file might not be expecting all kinds of names to be visible.)
The ability to refer to members in the std namespace without the need to refer to std::member explicitly. For example:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
...
cout << "Hi" << endl;
vs.
#include <iostream>
...
std::cout << "Hi" << std::endl;
You should definitely not say:
using namespace std;
in your C++ headers, because that beats the whole point of using namespaces (doing that would constitute "namespace pollution"). Some useful resources on this topic are the following:
1) stackoverflow thread on Standard convention for using “std”
2) an article by Herb Sutter on Migrating to Namespaces
3) FAQ 27.5 from Marshall Cline's C++ Faq lite.
First of all, this is not required in C - C does not have namespaces. In C++, anything in the std namespace which includes most of the standard library. If you don't do this you have to access the members of the namespace explicitly like so:
std::cout << "I am accessing stdout" << std::endl;
Firstly, the using directive is never required in C since C does not support namespaces at all.
The using directive is never actually required in C++ since any of the items found in the namespace can be accessed directly by prefixing them with std:: instead. So, for example:
using namespace std;
string myString;
is equivalent to:
std::string myString;
Whether or not you choose to use it is a matter of preference, but exposing the entire std namespace to save a few keystrokes is generally considered bad form. An alternative method which only exposes particular items in the namespace is as follows:
using std::string;
string myString;
This allows you to expose only the items in the std namespace that you particularly need, without the risk of unintentionally exposing something you didn't intend to.
Namespaces are a way of wrapping code to avoid confusion and names from conflicting. For example:
File common1.h:
namespace intutils
{
int addNumbers(int a, int b)
{
return a + b;
}
}
Usage file:
#include "common1.h"
int main()
{
int five = 0;
five = addNumbers(2, 3); // Will fail to compile since the function is in a different namespace.
five = intutils::addNumbers(2, 3); // Will compile since you have made explicit which namespace the function is contained within.
using namespace intutils;
five = addNumbers(2, 3); // Will compile because the previous line tells the compiler that if in doubt it should check the "intutils" namespace.
}
So, when you write using namespace std all you are doing is telling the compiler that if in doubt it should look in the std namespace for functions, etc., which it can't find definitions for. This is commonly used in example (and production) code simply because it makes typing common functions, etc. like cout is quicker than having to fully qualify each one as std::cout.
You never have to declare using namespace std; using it is is bad practice and you should use std:: if you don't want to type std:: always you could do something like this in some cases:
using std::cout;
By using std:: you can also tell which part of your program uses the standard library and which doesn't. Which is even more important that there might be conflicts with other functions which get included.
Rgds
Layne
All the files in the C++ standard library declare all of its entities within the std namespace.
e.g: To use cin,cout defined in iostream
Alternatives:
using std::cout;
using std::endl;
cout << "Hello" << endl;
std::cout << "Hello" << std::endl;
Nothing requires you to do -- unless you are implementer of C++ Standard Library and you want to avoid code duplication when declaring header files in both "new" and "old" style:
// cstdio
namespace std
{
// ...
int printf(const char* ...);
// ...
}
.
// stdio.h
#include <cstdio>
using namespace std;
Well, of course example is somewhat contrived (you could equally well use plain <stdio.h> and put it all in std in <cstdio>), but Bjarne Stroustrup shows this example in his The C++ Programming Language.
It's used whenever you're using something that is declared within a namespace. The C++ standard library is declared within the namespace std. Therefore you have to do
using namespace std;
unless you want to specify the namespace when calling functions within another namespace, like so:
std::cout << "cout is declared within the namespace std";
You can read more about it at http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/namespaces/.