Tried to argument the std::string so that it supports method "bool operator==(int)". I got errors:
$ g++ -std=c++11 te2.cc
te2.cc: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:
te2.cc:20:20: error: no matching function for call to ‘mstring::mstring(const char [4])’
te2.cc:20:20: note: candidates are:
te2.cc:10:7: note: mstring::mstring()
te2.cc:10:7: note: candidate expects 0 arguments, 1 provided
te2.cc:10:7: note: mstring::mstring(const mstring&)
te2.cc:10:7: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘const char [4]’ to ‘const mstring&’
te2.cc:10:7: note: mstring::mstring(mstring&&)
te2.cc:10:7: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘const char [4]’ to ‘mstring&&’
Here is the simple source:
#include <unordered_map>
#include <iostream>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class mstring : public string {
public:
//mstring (char* p) : std::string(p) {};
bool operator == (int x) {
int n = atoi(this->c_str());
return (n == x);
}
};
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
mstring t("123");
if (t == atoi(argv[1])) {
printf("yes\n");
} else {
printf("no\n");
}
}
If I uncomment the constructor /mstring (char* p) : std::string(p) {};, then it compiles and runs fine.
The question is, if it possible to make it work without defining the constructors for mstring, just use the whatever the constructors of the base class (there is no new data member anyway)? Thanks.
What about providing a free standing operator function instead of inheriting from std::string (which makes that code more usable overall):
bool operator==(const std::string& s, int i) {
int n = atoi(s.c_str());
return (n == i);
}
bool operator==(int i, const std::string& s) {
return s == i;
}
Or even more generic:
template<typename T>
bool operator==(const std::string& s, T t) {
std::istringstream iss;
iss << t;
return (s == iss.str());
}
Classes from the std namespace aren't intended to be inherited, but just used in interfaces and function parameters. Inheriting from those classes makes your code less usable, since clients need to use your implementation instead of just using the std type.
Also note: For your particular use case it's not necessary to convert anything at all, unless you want to assert that argv[1] contains a number (where atoi() certainly isn't the best method to do so, look up stoi() instead). You can just compare the strings:
if (std::string("123") == argv[1]) {
printf("yes\n");
} else {
printf("no\n");
}
you can explicitly inherit the constructors by adding
using string::string;
in your class
Related
I'm running a simple C++ program from HackerRank about pointers and it works fine on the website. However,
when I run it on MacOS, I get error: call to 'abs' is ambiguous and I'm not sure exactly what is ambiguous.
I've looked at other answers to similar issues, but the error message tends to be Ambiguous overload call to abs(double), which is not the issue I'm having, since I haven't used any doubles. I've also tried including the header files cmath and math.h, but the problem persists.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <cmath>
void update(int *a,int *b) {
int num1 = *a;
int num2 = *b;
*a = num1 + num2;
*b = abs(num1 - num2);
}
int main() {
int a, b;
int *pa = &a, *pb = &b;
scanf("%d %d", &a, &b);
update(pa, pb);
printf("%d\n%d", a, b);
return 0;
}
My issue occurs with line 8.
The full error message is:
$ clang++ test.cpp
test.cpp:8:10: error: call to 'abs' is ambiguous
*b = abs(num1 - num2);
^~~
.../include/c++/v1/math.h:769:1: note: candidate function
abs(float __lcpp_x) _NOEXCEPT {return ::fabsf(__lcpp_x);}
^
.../include/c++/v1/math.h:769:1: note: candidate function
abs(double __lcpp_x) _NOEXCEPT {return ::fabs(__lcpp_x);}
^
.../include/c++/v1/math.h:769:1: note: candidate function
abs(long double __lcpp_x) _NOEXCEPT {return ::fabsl(__lcpp_x);}
^
1 error generated.
The three overloads of abs that you have from <cmath> are abs(float), abs(double) and abs(long double); it's ambiguous because you have an int argument and the compiler doesn't know which floating-point type to convert to.
abs(int) is defined in <cstdlib>, so #include <cstdlib> will resolve your problem.
If you're using Xcode, you can get more details about the error in the Issues navigator (⌘5) and clicking the triangle next to your issue.
For me, #include <cstdlib> didn't solve the issue, maybe because I didn't have to include anything to use abs. So, in case it helps someone else, with explicit casting, it worked well for me like in the next code:
*b = abs(int(num1 - num2));
In templated code, it may be easily overlooked that std::abs is not defined for unsigned types. As an example, if the following method is instantiated for an unsigned type, the compiler may rightfully complain that std::abs is undefined:
template<typename T>
bool areClose(const T& left, const T& right) {
// This is bad because for unsigned T, std::abs is undefined
// and for integral T, we compare with a float instead of
// comparing for equality:
return (std::abs(left - right) < 1e-7);
}
int main() {
uint32_t vLeft = 17;
uint32_t vRight = 18;
std::cout << "Are the values close? " << areClose(vLeft, vRight) << std::endl;
}
A better definition of areClose() in above code, that would coincidentally also solve the problem of std::abs() being undefined, could look like this:
template<typename T>
bool areClose(const T& left, const T& right) {
// This is better: compare all integral values for equality:
if constexpr (std::is_integral<T>::value) {
return (left == right);
} else {
return (std::abs(left - right) < 1e-7);
}
}
if your using C compiler you should include
#include <stdlib.h>
and use abs without std::.
If you use C++ compiler then you should change abs to std::abs.
Hope it helps:)
I used #include <bits/stdc++.h> as the only include statement and it worked for me.
My code:
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
class Solution {
public:
vector<int> findDuplicates(vector<int>& nums) {
int n = nums.size();
if(n == 0 || n == 1)
return {};
vector<int> ans;
for(int i = 0; i < n; i++)
{
if(nums[abs(nums[i])-1] < 0)
ans.push_back(abs(nums[i]));
else
nums[abs(nums[i])-1] = -1 * nums[abs(nums[i])-1];
}
return ans;
}
};
Below is my code:
// this code illustrates iterating through a nested hashmap.
#include <iostream>
#include "imported.hpp"
#include <string>
#include <iomanip>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
#define MAX_LINE_LENGTH 999
using namespace std;
class State
{
public:
vector<string> vec;
string state_string;
State(string state_string, vector<string> vec);
};
State::State(string state_string, vector<string> vec)
{
this->state_string = state_string;
this->vec = vec;
}
class Heuristic
{
public:
State goal_state;
string type;
Heuristic(string type, State goal_state);
};
Heuristic::Heuristic(string type, State goal_state)
{
this->type = type;
this->goal_state = goal_state;
}
int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
}
When I try to compile it using:
g++ filename.cpp
The following output is produced:
$ g++ main.cpp
main.cpp: In constructor ‘Heuristic::Heuristic(std::string, State)’:
main.cpp:36:51: error: no matching function for call to ‘State::State()’
Heuristic::Heuristic(string type, State goal_state)
^
main.cpp:21:1: note: candidate: State::State(std::string, std::vector<std::basic_string<char> >)
State::State(string state_string, vector<string> vec)
^~~~~
main.cpp:21:1: note: candidate expects 2 arguments, 0 provided
main.cpp:12:7: note: candidate: State::State(const State&)
class State
^~~~~
main.cpp:12:7: note: candidate expects 1 argument, 0 provided
main.cpp:12:7: note: candidate: State::State(State&&)
main.cpp:12:7: note: candidate expects 1 argument, 0 provided
I am confused as to why this is happening since I am not even calling the constructor but rather am defining a function's method signature into which the user should be able to pass an existent State object. Please assist.
The Heuristic constructor is built using assignment operators which involves the default construction of its member objects. Since State does not have a default constructor, this form of construction will fail.
There are two ways of solving this:
If the members have user-defined constructors, provide default-constructors also for them .
Use initializer lists for your constructor instead of assignments within the body of the constructor.
Of these two methods, the second one is more preferable. The reasons for this are outlined in the FAQ: Should my constructors use “initialization lists” or “assignment”?
I have seen similar questions asked and tried their solutions but the answers to them do not seem to work. I have the following code:
.h
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <string>
using std::string; using std::vector;
struct DialogueNode;
struct DialogueOption {
string text;
DialogueNode *next_node;
int return_code;
DialogueOption(string t, int rc, DialogueNode * nn) : text{t},
return_code{rc}, next_node{nn} {}
};
struct DialogueNode {
string text;
vector <DialogueOption> dialogue_options;
DialogueNode();
DialogueNode(const string &);
};
struct DialogueTree {
DialogueTree() {}
void init();
void destroyTree();
int performDialogue();
private:
vector <DialogueNode*> dialogue_nodes;
};
.cpp
#include "dialogue_tree.h"
DialogueNode::DialogueNode(const string &t) : text{t} {}
void DialogueTree::init() {
string s = "Hello";
for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
DialogueNode *node = new DialogueNode(s);
dialogue_nodes.push_back(node);
delete node;
}
}
void DialogueTree::destroyTree() {
}
int DialogueTree::performDialogue() {
return 0;
}
int main() {
return 0;
}
I get the error: error: no matching function for call to ‘DialogueNode:: DialogueNode(std::__cxx11::string&)’ DialogueNode *node = new DialogueNode(s);
EDIT additional notes on error
dialogue_tree.h:17:8: note: candidate: DialogueNode::DialogueNode()
dialogue_tree.h:17:8: note: candidate expects 0 arguments, 1 provided
dialogue_tree.h:17:8: note: candidate: DialogueNode::DialogueNode(const DialogueNode&)
dialogue_tree.h:17:8: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘std::__cxx11::string {aka std::__cxx11::basic_string<char>}’ to ‘const DialogueNode&’
dialogue_tree.h:17:8: note: candidate: DialogueNode::DialogueNode(DialogueNode&&)
dialogue_tree.h:17:8: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘std::__cxx11::string {aka std::__cxx11::basic_string<char>}’ to ‘DialogueNode&&’
Which makes no sense to me because I have the constructor defined to take a string as an argument.
You've declared your constructor as:
DialogueNode(const string);
But defined it as:
DialogueNode(const string &t);
Those two aren't the same; the former takes a const string while the latter takes a const string reference. You'll have to add the & to specify a reference argument:
DialogueNode(const string &);
it is because in the constructor you are specifying that the parameter will be a string of constant type and when creating an object you are passing a string. The type mismatch is the problem, either fix the constructor parameter to string or change when you are creating an object.
In my actual code, I included a library, and as soon as I did that, it started crashing. I managed to sort of extract some of that code into this minimal example, that demonstrates the same kind of error:
// g++ -std=c++11 -g -o test-classcall.exe test-classcall.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <stdio.h>
class Cat
{
public:
int Age;
Cat() : Age(0) {}
};
std::vector<Cat> myPCats;
typedef std::vector<Cat> TDVectCats;
TDVectCats myTDCats;
void loopSomeCats() {
printf("this function just to cause searching for matching calls\n");
}
void loopSomeCats(TDVectCats& incats) {
std::vector<Cat>::iterator iter;
for(iter = incats.begin(); iter != incats.end(); iter++) {
printf("hm\n");
}
}
const std::vector<Cat> & getSomeCats() {
return myPCats;
}
void doSomething() {
loopSomeCats(getSomeCats());
}
int main() {
myTDCats.push_back(Cat());
myTDCats.push_back(Cat());
myPCats.push_back(Cat());
doSomething();
std::cout << "Hello World! " << std::endl;
return 0;
}
The result is:
$ g++ -std=c++11 -g -o test-classcall.exe test-classcall.cpp
test-classcall.cpp: In function ‘void doSomething()’:
test-classcall.cpp:36:29: error: no matching function for call to ‘loopSomeCats(const std::vector<Cat>&)’
loopSomeCats(getSomeCats());
^
test-classcall.cpp:36:29: note: candidates are:
test-classcall.cpp:20:6: note: void loopSomeCats()
void loopSomeCats() {
^
test-classcall.cpp:20:6: note: candidate expects 0 arguments, 1 provided
test-classcall.cpp:24:6: note: void loopSomeCats(TDVectCats&)
void loopSomeCats(TDVectCats& incats) {
^
test-classcall.cpp:24:6: note: no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘const std::vector<Cat>’ to ‘TDVectCats& {aka std::vector<Cat>&}’
What especially confuses me, is the last "no known conversion for argument 1 from ‘const std::vector<Cat>’ to ‘TDVectCats& {aka std::vector<Cat>&}’", as if it cannot convert a vector of something, into the vector of the same something, just because of typedef? Or it maybe has to do with the const - but I simply cannot see what I need to change, in order to have a call like loopSomeCats(getSomeCats()); succeed...
You can't pass a reference to a const object to a non-const reference.
loopSomeCats takes a std::vector<Cat>& as argument, and you want to pass a const std::vector<Cat>& to it, but that's not possible.
The const would mean that you don't want anyone to modify the return value, but if you pass it to a function which just takes a non-const reference, then theoretically the function can modify the reference, and you don't want that.
You should drop the const if you want the return value to be modified.
I want to count all numbers in string in shortest code way. I tried that way:
#include <string>
#include <algorithm>
unsigned countNumbers(const std::string s) {
return count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), isdigit);
}
Error message is:
a.cc: In function ‘unsigned int countNumbers(std::string)’:
a.cc:5:45: error: no matching function for call to ‘count_if(std::basic_string<char>::const_iterator, std::basic_string<char>::const_iterator, <unresolved overloaded function type>)’
a.cc:5:45: note: candidate is:
/usr/include/c++/4.6/bits/stl_algo.h:4607:5: note: template<class _IIter, class _Predicate> typename std::iterator_traits<_InputIterator>::difference_type std::count_if(_IIter, _IIter, _Predicate)
I know that count_if() wants function like:
bool (*f)(char); as a third argument, so I tried to cast the function:
unsigned countNumbers(const std::string s) {
return count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), reinterpret_cast<bool (*)( char )>(isdigit));
}
Error message is:
a.cc: In function ‘unsigned int countNumbers(std::string)’:
a.cc:5:80: error: overloaded function with no contextual type information
I tried also a bit longer version, which gives the same compilation error:
unsigned countNumbers(const std::string s) {
typedef bool ( * f_ptr )( char );
f_ptr ptr = reinterpret_cast<f_ptr>(isdigit);
return count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), ptr);
}
The solution that I want to avoid is to create a function which would be an adapter:
#include <string>
#include <algorithm>
bool is_digit(char c) {
return isdigit(c);
}
unsigned countNumbers(const std::string s) {
return count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), is_digit);
}
My question is how can I use functions int(*f)(int) in std::algorithm's functions which want bool(*f)(int) without creating adapter-functions and without using lambda expressions?
I have more issues which would be solved when I get know how to solve the problem, e.g.:
Check if string is printable: find_if_not(s.begin(), s.end(), isprint)
Check if string contains ",.!?...": find_if (s.begin(), s.end(), ispunct)
and more...
I just want to know how to have much more string possibilities in standard C++ thanks to std::algorithms
I was searching at the Internet long time, I found similar problem, but I found no solution
You can resolve the function by using a static cast. Alternatively if this is something you want to do a lot you can use a template to resolve it:
#include <string>
#include <cctype>
#include <algorithm>
unsigned count(const std::string& s) {
return std::count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), static_cast<int(*)(int)>(std::isdigit));
}
template <int(*Pred)(int)>
unsigned foo(const std::string& s) {
return std::count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), Pred);
}
int main() {
count("");
foo<std::isdigit>("");
foo<std::isprint>("");
}
static_cast is the "usual" way of resolving ambiguous - it always does what you expect and can be part of a larger expression.
Resolve the type by using a function pointer:
unsigned countNumbers(const std::string s) {
int (*isdigit)(int) = std::isdigit;
return count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), isdigit);
}
Don't forget to include <cctype>. (demo)
I found following also works:
#include <ctype.h>
count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), ::isdigit); //explicitly select the C version of isdigit
but i have to figure out that it works only if the C version is defined as a function
rather than a macro
thus, well, the static_cast of std::isdigit could be the best portable solution among platforms.
I'll give 2 other solutions to fix the ambiguity with <locale> std::isdigit
Use a lambda expression:
std::count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), [](char c){ return std::isdigit(c); })
or with explicit casting:
std::count_if(s.begin(), s.end(), [](char c){ return std::isdigit(static_cast<int>(c)) != 0; })
Use explicit template types (you also need to write the iterator type):
std::count_if<std::string::const_iterator, int(*)(int)>(s.begin(), s.end(), std::isdigit)