I am trying to unit test a C++ application that I am building and I'm having an issue initializing the array when used in a class. I've tried alot of different methods of loading this information, the only ones that work are inefficient / not suitable.
Here is the hex array that I have (randomised the parts)
0x24,0x54,0x3b,0x72,0x8b,0x03,0x24,0x29,0x23,0x43,0x66,0x22,0x53,0x41,0x11,0x62,0x10
And header file for my unit test:
class MessageParsingTest : public CPPUNIT_NS::TestFixture {
CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE(MessageParsingTest);
CPPUNIT_TEST(testIdentifyFirstMessageType);
CPPUNIT_TEST_SUITE_END();
public:
MessageParsingTest();
virtual ~MessageParsingTest();
void setUp();
void tearDown();
private:
void testIdentifyFirstMessageType();
void testIdentifySecondMessageType();
// data members for the hex array
unsigned char firstMessage[1500];
};
Then in my test case setUp function;
void MessageParsingTest::setUp() {
firstMessage = {0x24,0x54,0x3b,0x72,0x8b,0x03,0x24,0x29,0x23,0x43,0x66,0x22,0x53,0x41,0x11,0x62,0x10};
}
That it my latest failed attempt, it says its not valid during compilcation, as I expected, but at this point I was trying anything.
I've also tried things like (all in setUp function)
firstMessage << "\0x24\0x54\0x3b\0x72\0x8b\0x03\0x24\0x29\0x23\0x43\0x66\0x22\0x53\0x41\0x11\0x62\0x10";
firstMessage[1500] = "\0x24\0x54\0x3b\0x72\0x8b\0x03\0x24\0x29\0x23\0x43\0x66\0x22\0x53\0x41\0x11\0x62\0x10";
and a few other crazy ways, Does anyone know the proper way to load this data? the only way I've had it working so far is with either no data member declaration and straight up defining it and initializing in one line (but then I cant access in the test cases) or doing it one by one like firstMessage[0] = 0x24; etc.
I understand that there will be a simple, proper way of doing this and considering what the application actually does, this part should be the easiest.
You have few options:
Initialize arrays in constructor MesssageParsingTest using syntax : firstMessage{0x24,0x54,0x3b,0x72,0x8b,0x03,0x24,0x29,0x23,0x43,0x66,0x22,0x53,0x41,0x11,0x62,0x10}
in initializer list.
Create static const array containing your message, and either copy it to member variable using memcpy, or use static member and get rid of firstMessage member variable.
Declare const static member in .h inside class definition:
static const unsigned char kFirstMessage[];
and define + initialize it in .ccp
const unsigned char MessageParsingTest::kFirstMessage[] = "\0x24\0x54\0x3b\0x72\0x8b\0x03\0x24\0x29\0x23\0x43\0x66\0x22\0x53\0x41\0x11\0x62\0x10";
I would prefer static const member if you do not intend to modify this array later, since it makes the intention cleaner.
Here is one way to do it.
void MessageParsingTest::setUp()
{
unsigned char x[] = {0x24,0x54,0x3b,0x72,0x8b,0x03,0x24,0x29,0x23,0x43,0x66,0x22,0x53,0x41,0x11,0x62,0x10};
::memcpy(firstMessage, x, sizeof(x));
}
If you are using C++11, you can also initialize the firstMessage in the class member initialization list as
MessageParsingTest::MessageParsingTest() :
firstMessage{0x24,0x54,0x3b,0x72,0x8b,0x03,0x24,0x29,0x23,0x43,0x66,0x22,0x53,0x41,0x11,0x62,0x10},
...
You can use a temporary buffer and then copy into you member as this:
void MessageParsingTest::setUp() {
unsigned char tmp[1500] = {0x24,0x54,0x3b,0x72,0x8b,0x03,0x24,0x29,0x23,0x43,0x66,0x22,0x53,0x41,0x11,0x62,0x10};
memcpy(firstMessage, tmp, 1500);
}
Related
In a class header file Texture.h I declare a static const int.
static const int MAX_TEXTURE_SLOTS;
In Texture.cpp I define the variable as 0.
const int Texture::MAX_TEXTURE_SLOTS = 0;
Now in Window.cpp class's constructor I attempt to assign to the variable using an out parameter, however this obviously does not compile as &Texture::MAX_TEXTURE_SLOTS points to a const int* and not an int* .
glGetIntegerv(GL_MAX_TEXTURE_IMAGE_UNITS, &Texture::MAX_TEXTURE_SLOTS);
I have tried using const_cast, but am greeted with a segmentation fault on runtime.
glGetIntegerv(GL_MAX_TEXTURE_IMAGE_UNITS, const_cast<int*>(&Texture::MAX_TEXTURE_SLOTS));
I have also tried directly casting to an int * but once again, seg fault.
glGetIntegerv(GL_MAX_TEXTURE_IMAGE_UNITS, (int*)&Texture::MAX_TEXTURE_SLOTS);
Many thanks.
EDIT 2: So since you're trying to abstract OpenGL contexts, you'll have to let go of the "traditional" constructor/destructor idioms. And just for your information (unrelated to this question): OpenGL contexts are not tied to windows! As long as a set of windows and OpenGL contexts are compatible with each other, you may mix and match any way you like. But I digress.
The standard idiom to deal with a situation like yours is to use preinitializing factory functions. Like this:
class MyOpenGLContextWrapper {
public:
// Yes, shared_ptr; using a unique_ptr here for objects that are kind
// of a nexus for other things -- like an OpenGL context -- just creates
// a lot of pain and misery. Trust me, I know what I'm talkink about.
typedef std::shared_ptr<MyOpenGLContextWrapper> ptr;
struct constdata {
NativeGLContextType context;
// ...
GLint max_texture_image_units;
// ...
};
static ptr create();
protected:
MyOpenGLContextWrapper(constdata const &cdata) : c(cdata) {};
virtual ~MyOpenGLContextWrapper();
constdata const c;
}
MyOpenGLContextWrapper::ptr MyOpenGLContextWrapper::create()
{
struct object : public MyOpenGLContextWrapper {
object(MyOpenGLContextWrapper::constdata const &cdata) : MyOpenGLContextWrapper(cdata) {}
~object(){}
};
MyOpenGLContextWrapper::constdata cdata = {};
// of course this should all also do error checking and failure rollbacks
cdata.context = create_opengl_context();
bind_opengl_context(cdata.context);
// ...
glGetInteger(GL_MAX_TEXTURE_IMAGE_UNITS, &cdata.max_texture_image_units);
return std::make_shared<object>(cdata);
}
EDIT: I just saw that you intend to use this to hold on to a OpenGL limit. In that case you can't do this on a global scope anyway, since those values depend on the OpenGL context in use. A process may have several OpenGL contexts, each with different limits.
On most computer systems you'll encounter these days, variables declared const in global scope will be placed in memory that has been marked as read only. You literally can't assign to such a variable.
The usual approach to implement global scope runtime constants is by means of query functions that will return from an internal or otherwise concealed or protected value. Like
// header.h
int runtime_constant();
#define RUNTIME_CONSTANT runtime_constant()
// implementation.c / .cpp
int runtime_constant_query(){
static int x = 0;
// NOTE: This is not thread safe!
if( !x ){ x = determine_value(); }
return x;
}
You can then fetch the value by calling that function.
Provided that glGetIntegerv doesn't depend on other gl* functions being called before, you may use an immediately-invoked lambda:
// Texture.cpp
const int Texture::MAX_TEXTURE_SLOTS = []
{
int maxTextureSlots{0}:
glGetIntegerv(GL_MAX_TEXTURE_IMAGE_UNITS, &maxTextureSlots);
return maxTextureSlots;
}();
You don't.
You can't assign to a const outside of its definition. Also, using a const variable where the const has been const_casted away is UB. This also means you can't directly initialize a const variable with an output parameter. For trivial types, just output to another variable and make a const copy if you so wish.
If you were the author of the function you're calling, you would do well not to use out parameters, and then you could assign to const variables directly, perhaps using structured bindings if you want to name multiple of the outputs at a time. But here, you're not.
I have an integer constant that is to be defined at runtime. This constant needs to be available globally and across multiple source files. I currently have the following simplified situation:
ClassA.h declares extern const int someConstant;
ClassA.cpp uses someConstant at some point.
Constants.h declares extern const int someConstant;
main.cpp includes ClassA.h and Constants.h, declares const int someConstant, and at some point during main() tries to initialize someConstant to the real value during runtime.
This works flawlessly with a char * constant that I use to have the name of the program globally available across all files, and it's declared and defined exactly like the one I'm trying to declare and define here but I can't get it to work with an int.
I get first an error: uninitialized const ‘someConstant’ [-fpermissive] at the line I'm declaring it in main.cpp, and later on I get an error: assignment of read-only variable ‘someConstant’ which I presume is because someConstant is getting default initialized to begin with.
Is there a way to do what I'm trying to achieve here? Thanks in advance!
EDIT (per request from #WhozCraig): Believe me: it is constant. The reason I'm not posting MCVE is because of three reasons: this is an assignment, the source is in Spanish, and because I really wanted to keep the question as general (and reusable) as possible. I started out writing the example and midway it striked me as not the clearest question. I'll try to explain again.
I'm asked to build a program that creates a process that in turn spawns two children (those in turn will spawn two more each, and so on). The program takes as single argument the number of generations it will have to spawn. Essentially creating sort of a binary tree of processes. Each process has to provide information about himself, his parent, the relationship with the original process, and his children (if any).
So, in the example above, ClassA is really a class containing information about the process (PID, PPID, children's PIDs, degree of relation with the original process, etc). For each fork I create a new instance of this class, so I can "save" this information and print it on screen.
When I'm defining the relationship with the original process, there's a single point in which I need to know the argument used when calling the program to check if this process has no children (to change the output of that particular process). That's the constant I need from main: the number of generations to be spawned, the "deepness" of the tree.
EDIT 2: I'll have to apologize, it's been a long day and I wasn't thinking straight. I switched the sources from C to C++ just to use some OO features and completely forgot to think inside of the OO paradigm. I just realized while I was explaining this that I might solve this with a static/class variable inside my class (initialized with the original process), it might not be constant (although semantically it is) but it should work, right? Moreover I also realized I could just initialize the children of the last generation with some impossible PID value and use that to check if it is the last generation.
Sorry guys and thank you for your help: it seems the question was valid but it was the wrong question to ask all along. New mantra: walk off the computer and relax.
But just to recap and to stay on point, it is absolutely impossible to create a global constant that would be defined at runtime in C++, like #Jerry101 says?
In C/C++, a const is defined at compile time. It cannot be set at runtime.
The reason you can set a const char *xyz; at runtime is this declares a non-const pointer to a const char. Tricky language.
So if you want an int that can be determined in main() and not changed afterwards, you can write a getter int xyz() that returns a static value that gets initialized in main() or in the getter.
(BTW, it's not a good idea to declare the same extern variable in more than one header file.)
As others have mentioned, your variable is far from being constant if you set it only at run-time. You cannot "travel back in time" and include a value gained during the program's execution into the program itself before it is being built.
What you can still do, of course, is to define which components of your program have which kind of access (read or write) to your variable.
If I were you, I would turn the global variable into a static member variable of a class with a public getter function and private setter function. Declare the code which needs to set the value as a friend.
class SomeConstant
{
public:
static int get()
{
return someConstant;
}
private:
friend int main(); // this should probably not be `main` in real code
static void set(int value)
{
someConstant = value;
}
static int someConstant = 0;
};
In main:
int main()
{
SomeConstant::set(123);
}
Anywhere else:
void f()
{
int i = SomeConstant::get();
}
You can further hide the class with some syntactic sugar:
int someConstant()
{
return SomeConstant::get();
}
// ...
void f()
{
int i = someConstant();
}
Finally, add some error checking to make sure you notice if you try to access the value before it is set:
class SomeConstant
{
public:
static int get()
{
assert(valueSet);
return someConstant;
}
private:
friend int main(); // this should probably not be `main` in real code
static void set(int value)
{
someConstant = value;
valueSet = true;
}
static bool valueSet = false;
static int someConstant = 0;
};
As far as your edit is concerned:
Nothing of this has anything to do with "OO". Object-oriented programming is about virtual functions, and I don't see how your problem is related to virtual functions.
char * - means ur creating a pointer to char datatype.
int - on other hand creates a variable. u cant declare a const variable without value so i suggest u create a int * and use it in place of int. and if u are passing it into functions make it as const
eg: int *myconstant=&xyz;
....
my_function(myconstant);
}
//function decleration
void my_function(const int* myconst)
{
....
}
const qualifier means variable must initialized in declaration point. If you are trying to change her value at runtime, you get UB.
Well, the use of const in C++ is for the compiler to know the value of a variable at compile time, so that it can perform value substitution(much like #define but much more better) whenever it encounters the variable. So you must always assign a value to a const when u define it, except when you are making an explicit declaration using extern. You can use a local int to receive the real value at run time and then you can define and initialize a const int with that local int value.
int l_int;
cout<<"Enter an int";
cin>>l_int;
const int constNum = l_int;
I'm currently working on a program which randomly generates items (e.g. weapons, armour etc.) and I want to make global constant vectors which hold all the names that could be given to the items. I want to have this 2D vector in a header file that's available to all my other classes (but not modifiable), so I need to initialise it at declaration.
I previously used the following:
static const std::string v[] =
{
"1.0", "1.1", "1.2", "null"
};
const std::vector<std::string> versions( v, v+sizeof( v)/sizeof( v[0]));
This worked for a 1D vector, however I want to use a 2D vector to store item names.
I have tried using the following however it means I don't have the member functions (such as size()):
static const std::string g_wn_a[] = { "Spear", "Lance", "Jouster" };
static const std::string g_wn_b[] = { "Sword", "Broadsword", "Sabre", "Katana" };
const std::string* g_weapon_names[] = { g_wn_a, g_wn_b };
I also don't want to use a class to store all the names because I feel it would be inefficient to have variables created to store all the names everytime I wanted to use them.
Does anyone know how I can solve my problem?
You could use a class with const static members. This way, your class would just behave like a namespace and you wouldn't have to create an instance of the name-holding class to use the names.
struct MyNames {
// const static things
const static string myweapon = "Katana"
};
string s = MyNames::myweapon; // s = "Katana"
This is C++, so the most common way to do this is to write a class that does this in its constructor, and then create a const object of that class. Your class would then provide various member functions to query the various items it maintains.
As a bonus, this will make it easier for the rest of your code to use the various items.
I'm writing a library where the user can define arbitrary structures and pass them to my library, which will then obtain the memory layout of the structure from a static member such structure must have as a convention.
For example:
struct CubeVertex {
// This is, per convention, required in each structure to describe itself
static const VertexElement Elements[];
float x, y, z;
float u, v;
};
const VertexElement CubeVertex::Elements[] = {
VertexElement("Position", VertexElementType::Float3),
VertexElement("TextureCoordinates", VertexElementType::Float2),
};
C++ best practices would suggest that I move the static variable and its initialization into my source (.cpp) file. I, however, want to keep the variable initialization as close to the structure as possible since whenever the structure changes, the variable has to be updated as well.
Is there a portable (= MSVC + GCC at least) way to declare such a variable inside the header file without causing ambiguous symbol / redefinition errors from the linker?
Consider a simple getter.
struct CubeVertex {
static const std::array<VertexElement, N>& GetElements() {
static const std::array<VertexElement, N> result = {
//..
};
return result;
}
//..
}
Immediate benefit: No array-to-pointer-decay.
What you could do here is using an anonymous namespace.
Wrap everything into "namespace { ... };" and you can then access CubeVertex::Elements like you normally do.
However, this creates a new instance of the static data everytime you include the headerfile, which adds to the executable's filesize.
It also has some limitations on how to use the class/struct, because you cannot call functions of that class from another file (which won't be a problem in this special case here).
When I write code like this in VS 2008:
.h
struct Patterns {
string ptCreate;
string ptDelete;
string ptDrop;
string ptUpdate;
string ptInsert;
string ptSelect;
};
class QueryValidate {
string query;
string pattern;
static Patterns pts;
public:
friend class Query;
QueryValidate(const string& qr, const string& ptn):
query(qr), pattern(ptn) {}
bool validate() {
boost::regex rg(pattern);
return boost::regex_match(query, rg);
}
virtual ~QueryValidate() {}
};
I then initialize my structure like this:
.cpp
string QueryValidate::pts::ptCreate = "something";
string QueryValidate::pts::ptDelete = "something";
//...
The compiler gives the following errors:
'Patterns': the symbol to the left of a '::' must be a type 'ptSelect'
: is not a member of 'QueryValidate'
What am I doing wrong? Is this a problem with Visual Studio or with my code? I know that static members except for const ones must be defined outside the class they were declared in.
You're trying to create a non-static member (ptCreate) of a static member (pts). This won't work like this.
You got two options, either use a struct initializer list for the Patterns class.
Patterns QueryValidate::pts = {"CREATE", "DELETE"}; // etc. for every string
Or, much safer (and better in my opinion), provide a constructor in Patterns and call that one.
struct Patterns {
Patterns() { /*...*/ }
/* ... */
}
On a side not, your code wouldn't work in any C++ compiler, it's not a conflict with Visual Studio things.
You can only initialize the structure as a whole, as in:
Patterns QueryValidate::pts = { "something", "something", ... };
This isn't valid C++. In the cpp file you're declaring parts of the static structure "QueryValidate::pts", but that's not allowed: you've got to declare the whole structure, like so:
Patterns QueryValidate::pts;
if you want members to be initialized, you either initialize them in another method, or add a constructor to Patterns that takes whatever initialization arguments you want.
I'm not real sure what you are trying to do here. It looks kind of like you are trying to declare and initialize each field in pts separately, rather than declare pts once as a single object. I'm really surprised VS lets you do that.
What worked for me in gcc was the following:
Patterns QueryValidate::pts;
void foo () {
QueryValidate::pts.ptCreate = "something";
QueryValidate::pts.ptDelete = "something";
}