It is a pain to do an endline between each value with OFSTREAM.
Here's an example of what I've got:
ofstream fout("~/xample.txt");
fout << val1;
fout << endl;
fout << val2;
I want to be able to do, instead,
ofstream fout("xample.txt");
fout << val1;
fout << val2;
I don't care how the file is stored because I will write a configuration wizard anyways.
If fout << val1 << endl; does not work with you, you might be able to inherit ofstream and create your own stream that adds endl automatically. But also you can drink water from fire hydrant.
It is a pain ...
Besides you could simply write
fout << val1 << endl;
fout << val2 << endl;
you may use any other whitespace character value to delimit your values in the output file:
fout << val1 << ' ';
fout << val2 << ' ';
// ... more value outputs
fout << endl;
Shouldn't matter for the file size, but number of lines definitely.
UPDATE:
As you're asking how to extend the formatting behavior on std::ostream:
I don't think it's a good idea to use inheritance from std::streambuf, std::ostream, et al., and try to (re-)implement the interfaces themselves (as usually never it's a good idea inheriting STL classes, can be done though). I'd say the intended way is to use stream manipulators for such.
To automate appending the endl or any other delimiter you could write a small parameterized stream manipulator (at least this solution is copy/paste and IDE intellisense friendly):
template<typename T>
class auto_delim_manip
{
public:
auto_delim_manip(T value_, char delim_)
: value(value_)
, delim(delim_) {}
void put(std::ostream& os) const {
os << value << delim;
os.flush();
}
private:
T value;
char delim;
};
template<typename T>
auto_delim_manip<T> auto_delim(T value, char delim = '\n') {
return auto_delim_manip<T>(value,delim);
}
template<typename T>
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const auto_delim_manip<T>& autoDelim)
{
autoDelim.put(os);
return os;
}
int main() {
cout << auto_delim(5.2) << auto_delim(3) << auto_delim("Hello!");
return 0;
}
Output:
5.2
3
Hello!
Check the running sample here.
If you have a large number of values, simply put 'endl' on the same line as your output and loop through all of your data. Such as:
for(int i = 0; i < numValues; ++i) {
fout << values[i] << endl;
}
I'm not aware of a built-in way to automate this, but it's honestly not that much work to add line endings manually.
Related
I have some C++ console programs that display progress information on the last line of output, at regular intervals.
This progress line is cleared prior to writing the next real output (or updated progress information); this could be from a number of different places in the source, and I'm currently clearing the progress line on each one, e.g.:
cout << clearline << "Some real output" << endl;
...
cout << clearline << "Some other real output" << endl;
...
cout << clearline << setw(4) << ++icount << ") " << ... << endl;
...
cout << clearline << "Progress info number " << ++iprog << flush;
Here, 'clearline' is some (system dependent) string like "\r\33[2K" which clears the current last line.
I would prefer something cleaner, that localises source changes to the actual line that's going to be cleared, like simply:
cout << "Progress info number " << ++iprog << flush << defer_clearline;
where 'defer_clearline' causes the writing of 'clearline' to be deferred until just prior to the next cout output, wherever and whatever that happens to be. I then wouldn't need to use 'clearline' on all the other lines.
I thought it might be possible to do this if 'defer_clearline' is a manipulator, and/or using xalloc() and iword().
But I've not managed to get anything that works.
Is it possible to do this sort of thing, and if so how?
2020-12-30: edited to include missing 'flush's.
You can pretty easily setup an std::cout wrapper:
// Declare the empty struct clear_line and instantiate the object cls
struct clear_line { } cls;
class out {
private:
std::ostream &strm = std::cout;
bool is_next_clear = false;
public:
template <typename T>
out& operator<<(const T& obj) {
if(is_next_clear) {
strm << std::endl << std::endl << std::endl; // clear logic
is_next_clear = false;
}
strm << obj;
return *this;
}
out& operator<<(const clear_line& _) {
is_next_clear = true;
return *this;
}
};
This pretty simply stores an is_next_clear bool for whether or not the next regular output should be cleared. Then, in the general case (the templated operator<<()), we run your clear logic and flip the is_next_clear flag if applicable. Then just output as usual.
Then, the operator<<() is overloaded for the case of a clear_line object. So if one of those is sent, we know to flip the is_next_clear flag, but not actually output anything.
Here's an example use:
int main() {
out o;
o << "Some real output" << cls;
o << "Some other real output";
return 0;
}
Here it is in action: https://ideone.com/0Dzwlv
If you want to use endl, you'll need to add a special overload for it as this answer suggests: https://stackoverflow.com/a/1134467/2602718
// this is the type of std::cout
typedef std::basic_ostream<char, std::char_traits<char> > CoutType;
// this is the function signature of std::endl
typedef CoutType& (*StandardEndLine)(CoutType&);
// define an operator<< to take in std::endl
out& operator<<(StandardEndLine manip)
{
// call the function, but we cannot return its value
manip(strm);
return *this;
}
Live example: https://ideone.com/ACUMOo
I am chaining some stream manipulators in an ofstream like so:
std::string filename = "output.txt";
std::ofstream outputFile;
outputFile.open(filename, std::ios::trunc);
outputFile << std::setw(5) << std::scientific << std::left << variable;
Is it possible to do something like this instead?:
std::string filename = "output.txt";
std::ofstream outputFile;
outputFile.open(filename, std::ios::trunc);
std::ostream m;
m << std::setw(5) << std::scientific << std::left; // Combine manipulators into a single variable
outputFile << m << variable;
A stream manipulator is just a function that a stream calls on itself through one of the operator << overloads (10-12 in the link). You just have to declare such a function (or something convertible to a suitable function pointer):
constexpr auto m = [](std::ostream &s) -> std::ostream& {
return s << std::setw(5) << std::scientific << std::left;
};
std::cout << m << 12.3 << '\n';
See it live on Wandbox
You can write your own manipulator:
struct my_manipulator{};
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& o, const my_manipulator& mm) {
o << std::setw(5) << std::scientific << std::left;
return o;
};
This would allow you to write
outputFile << my_manipulator{} << variable;
PS: Io-manipulators modify the state of the stream. Hence it cannot work exactly the way you asked for. You are modifying the state of m. Transferring the state from one stream to another is possible, but imho more complicated than necessary.
PPS: Note that my way of defining a custom io-manipulator is ok-ish, but to see an implementation that is more in the spirit of stream manipulators see this answer (usually io-manipulators are functions, I used a tag which requires a tiny bit more boilerplate).
I am trying to overload
<<
operator. For instance
cout << a << " " << b << " "; // I am not allowed to change this line
is given I have to print it in format
<literal_valueof_a><"\n>
<literal_valueof_b><"\n">
<"\n">
I tried to overload << operator giving string as argument but it is not working. So I guess literal
" "
is not a string. If it is not then what is it. And how to overload it?
Kindly help;
Full code
//Begin Program
// Begin -> Non - Editable
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
// End -> Non -Editable
//---------------------------------------------------------------------
// Begin -> Editable (I have written )
ostream& operator << (ostream& os, const string& str) {
string s = " ";
if(str == " ") {
os << '\n';
}
else {
for(int i = 0; i < str.length(); ++i)
os << str[i];
}
return os;
}
// End -> Editable
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------
// Begin -> No-Editable
int main() {
int a, b;
double s, t;
string mr, ms;
cin >> a >> b >> s >> t ;
cin >> mr >> ms ;
cout << a << " " << b << " " ;
cout << s << " " << t << " " ;
cout << mr << " " << ms ;
return 0;
}
// End -> Non-Editable
//End Program
Inputs and outputs
Input
30 20 5.6 2.3 hello world
Output
30
20
5.6
2.3
hello
world
" " is a string-literal of length one, and thus has type const char[2]. std::string is not related.
Theoretically, you could thus overload it as:
auto& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const char (&s)[2]) {
return os << (*s == ' ' && !s[1] ? +"\n" : +s);
}
While that trumps all the other overloads, now things get really hairy. The problem is that some_ostream << " " is likely not uncommon, even in templates, and now no longer resolves to calling the standard function. Those templates now have a different definition in the affected translation-units than in non-affected ones, thus violating the one-definition-rule.
What you should do, is not try to apply a global solution to a very local problem:
Preferably, modify your code currently streaming the space-character.
Alternatively, write your own stream-buffer which translates it as you wish, into newline.
Sure this is possible, as I have tested. It should be portable since you are specifying an override of a templated function operator<<() included from <iostream>. The " " string in your code is not a std::string, but rather a C-style string (i.e. a const char *). The following definition works correctly:
ostream& operator << (ostream& os, const char *str) {
if(strcmp(str, " ") == 0) {
os << '\n';
} else {
// Call the standard library implementation
operator<< < std::char_traits<char> > (os, str);
}
return os;
}
Note that the space after std::char_traits<char> is necessary only if you are pre-c++11.
Edit 1
I agree with Deduplicator that this is a potentially dangerous solution as it may cause undesirable consequences elsewhere in the code base. If it is needed only in the current file, you could make it a static function (by putting it within an unnamed namespace). Perhaps if you shared more about the specifics of your problem, we could come up with a cleaner solution for you.
You might want to go with a user defined literal, e.g.
struct NewLine {};
std::ostream& operator << (std::ostream& os, NewLine)
{
return os << "\n";
}
NewLine operator ""_nl(const char*, std::size_t) // "nl" for newline
{
return {};
}
This can be used as follows.
int main(int, char **)
{
std::cout << 42 << ""_nl << "43" << ""_nl;
return 0;
}
Note three things here:
You can pass any string literal followed by the literal identifier, ""_nl does the same thing as " "_nl or "hello, world"_nl. You can change this by adjusting the function returning the NewLine object.
This solution is more of an awkward and confusing hack. The only real use case I can imagine is pertaining the option to easily change the behavior at a later point in time.
When doing something non-standard, it's best to make that obvious and explicit - here, the user defined literal indeed shines, because << ""_nl is more likely to catch readers' attention than << " ".
I would like to print a bunch of integers on 2 fields with '0' as fill character. I can do it but it leads to code duplication. How should I change the code so that the code duplication can be factored out?
#include <ctime>
#include <sstream>
#include <iomanip>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
string timestamp() {
time_t now = time(0);
tm t = *localtime(&now);
ostringstream ss;
t.tm_mday = 9; // cheat a little to test it
t.tm_hour = 8;
ss << (t.tm_year+1900)
<< setw(2) << setfill('0') << (t.tm_mon+1) // Code duplication
<< setw(2) << setfill('0') << t.tm_mday
<< setw(2) << setfill('0') << t.tm_hour
<< setw(2) << setfill('0') << t.tm_min
<< setw(2) << setfill('0') << t.tm_sec;
return ss.str();
}
int main() {
cout << timestamp() << endl;
return 0;
}
I have tried
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& s, int i) {
return s << std::setw(2) << std::setfill('0') << i;
}
but it did not work, the operator<< calls are ambigous.
EDIT I got 4 awesome answers and I picked the one that is perhaps the simplest and the most generic one (that is, doesn't assume that we are dealing with timestamps). For the actual problem, I will probably use std::put_time or strftime though.
In C++20 you'll be able to do this with std::format in a less verbose way:
ss << std::format("{}{:02}{:02}{:02}{:02}{:02}",
t.tm_year + 1900, t.tm_mon + 1, t.tm_mday,
t.tm_hour, t.tm_min, t.tm_sec);
and it's even easier with the {fmt} library that supports tm formatting directly:
auto s = fmt::format("{:%Y%m%d%H%M%S}", t);
You need a proxy for your string stream like this:
struct stream{
std::ostringstream ss;
stream& operator<<(int i){
ss << std::setw(2) << std::setfill('0') << i;
return *this; // See Note below
}
};
Then your formatting code will just be this:
stream ss;
ss << (t.tm_year+1900)
<< (t.tm_mon+1)
<< t.tm_mday
<< t.tm_hour
<< t.tm_min
<< t.tm_sec;
return ss.ss.str();
ps. Note the general format of my stream::operator<<() which does its work first, then returns something.
The "obvious" solution is to use a manipulator to install a custom std::num_put<char> facet which just formats ints as desired.
The above statement may be a bit cryptic although it entirely describes the solution. Below is the code to actually implement the logic. The first ingredient is a special std::num_put<char> facet which is just a class derived from std::num_put<char> and overriding one of its virtual functions. The used facet is a filtering facet which looks at a flag stored with the stream (using iword()) to determine whether it should change the behavior or not. Here is the code:
class num_put
: public std::num_put<char>
{
std::locale loc_;
static int index() {
static int rc(std::ios_base::xalloc());
return rc;
}
friend std::ostream& twodigits(std::ostream&);
friend std::ostream& notwodigits(std::ostream&);
public:
num_put(std::locale loc): loc_(loc) {}
iter_type do_put(iter_type to, std::ios_base& fmt,
char fill, long value) const {
if (fmt.iword(index())) {
fmt.width(2);
return std::use_facet<std::num_put<char> >(this->loc_)
.put(to, fmt, '0', value);
}
else {
return std::use_facet<std::num_put<char> >(this->loc_)
.put(to, fmt, fill, value);
}
}
};
The main part is the do_put() member function which decides how the value needs to be formatted: If the flag in fmt.iword(index()) is non-zero, it sets the width to 2 and calls the formatting function with a fill character of 0. The width is going to be reset anyway and the fill character doesn't get stored with the stream, i.e., there is no need for any clean-up.
Normally, the code would probably live in a separate translation unit and it wouldn't be declared in a header. The only functions really declared in a header would be twodigits() and notwodigits() which are made friends in this case to provide access to the index() member function. The index() member function just allocates an index usable with std::ios_base::iword() when called the time and it then just returns this index. The manipulators twodigits() and notwodigits() primarily set this index. If the num_put facet isn't installed for the stream twodigits() also installs the facet:
std::ostream& twodigits(std::ostream& out)
{
if (!dynamic_cast<num_put const*>(
&std::use_facet<std::num_put<char> >(out.getloc()))) {
out.imbue(std::locale(out.getloc(), new num_put(out.getloc())));
}
out.iword(num_put::index()) = true;
return out;
}
std::ostream& notwodigits(std::ostream& out)
{
out.iword(num_put::index()) = false;
return out;
}
The twodigits() manipulator allocates the num_put facet using new num_put(out.getloc()). It doesn't require any clean-up because installing a facet in a std::locale object does the necessary clean-up. The original std::locale of the stream is accessed using out.getloc(). It is changed by the facet. In theory the notwodigits could restore the original std::locale instead of using a flag. However, imbue() can be a relatively expensive operation and using a flag should be a lot cheaper. Of course, if there are lots of similar formatting flags, things may become different...
To demonstrate the use of the manipulators there is a simple test program below. It sets up the formatting flag twodigits twice to verify that facet is only created once (it would be a bit silly to create a chain of std::locales to pass through the formatting:
int main()
{
std::cout << "some-int='" << 1 << "' "
<< twodigits << '\n'
<< "two-digits1='" << 1 << "' "
<< "two-digits2='" << 2 << "' "
<< "two-digits3='" << 3 << "' "
<< notwodigits << '\n'
<< "some-int='" << 1 << "' "
<< twodigits << '\n'
<< "two-digits4='" << 4 << "' "
<< '\n';
}
Besides formatting integers with std::setw / std::setfill or ios_base::width / basic_ios::fill, if you want to format a date/time object you may want to consider using std::put_time / std::gettime
For convenient output formatting you may use boost::format() with sprintf-like formatting options:
#include <boost/format.hpp>
#include <iostream>
int main() {
int i1 = 1, i2 = 10, i3 = 100;
std::cout << boost::format("%03i %03i %03i\n") % i1 % i2 % i3;
// output is: 001 010 100
}
Little code duplication, additional implementation effort is marginal.
If all you want to do is output formatting of your timestamp, you should obviously use strftime(). That's what it's made for:
#include <ctime>
#include <iostream>
std::string timestamp() {
char buf[20];
const char fmt[] = "%Y%m%d%H%M%S";
time_t now = time(0);
strftime(buf, sizeof(buf), fmt, localtime(&now));
return buf;
}
int main() {
std::cout << timestamp() << std::endl;
}
operator<<(std::ostream& s, int i) is "ambiguous" because such a function already exists.
All you need to do is give that function a signature that doesn't conflict.
I'm having some trouble trying to implement a custom stream class to generate nicely indented code in an output file. I've searched online extensively but there doesn't seem to be a consensus on the best way to achieve this. Some people talk about deriving the stream, others talk about deriving the buffer, yet others suggest the use of locales/facets etc.
Essentially, I'm finding myself writing a lot of code like this:
ofstream myFile();
myFile.open("test.php");
myFile << "<html>" << endl <<
"\t<head>" << endl <<
"\t\t<title>Hello world</title>" << endl <<
"\t</head>" << endl <<
"</html>" << endl;
When the tabs start to add up it looks horrible, and it seems like it would be nice to have something like this:
ind_ofstream myFile();
myFile.open("test.php");
myFile << "<html>" << ind_inc << ind_endl <<
"<head>" << ind_inc << ind_endl <<
"<title>Hello world</title>" << ind_dec << ind_endl <<
"</head>" << ind_dec << ind_endl <<
"</html>" << ind_endl;
i.e. create a derived stream class which would keep track of its current indent depth, then some manipulators to increase/decrease the indent depth, and a manipulator to write a newline followed by however many tabs.
So here's my shot at implementing the class & manipulators:
ind_ofstream.h
class ind_ofstream : public ofstream
{
public:
ind_ofstream();
void incInd();
void decInd();
size_t getInd();
private:
size_t _ind;
};
ind_ofstream& inc_ind(ind_ofstream& is);
ind_ofstream& dec_ind(ind_ofstream& is);
ind_ofstream& endl_ind(ind_ofstream& is);
ind_ofstream.cpp
ind_ofstream::ind_ofstream() : ofstream() {_ind = 0;}
void ind_ofstream::incInd() {_ind++;}
void ind_ofstream::decInd() {if(_ind > 0 ) _ind--;}
size_t ind_ofstream::getInd() {return _ind;}
ind_ofstream& inc_ind(ind_ofstream& is)
{
is.incInd();
return is;
}
ind_ofstream& dec_ind(ind_ofstream& is)
{
is.decInd();
return is;
}
ind_ofstream& endl_ind(ind_ofstream& is)
{
size_t i = is.getInd();
is << endl;
while(i-- > 0) is << "\t";
return is;
}
This builds, but doesn't generate the expected output; any attempt to use the custom manipulators results in them being cast to a boolean for some reason and "1" written to the file. Do I need to overload the << operator for my new class? (I haven't been able to find a way of doing this that builds)
Thanks!
p.s.
1) I've omitted the #includes, using namespace etc from my code snippets to save space.
2) I'm aiming to be able to use an interface similar to the one in my second code snippet. If after reading the whole post, you think that's a bad idea, please explain why and provide an alternative.
The iostreams support adding custom data to them, so you don't need to write a full derived class just to add an indentation level that will be operated on by manipulators. This is a little-known feature of iostreams, but comes in handy here.
You would write your manipulators like this:
/* Helper function to get a storage index in a stream */
int get_indent_index() {
/* ios_base::xalloc allocates indices for custom-storage locations. These indices are valid for all streams */
static int index = ios_base::xalloc();
return index;
}
ios_base& inc_ind(ios_base& stream) {
/* The iword(index) function gives a reference to the index-th custom storage location as a integer */
stream.iword(get_indent_index())++;
return stream;
}
ios_base& dec_ind(ios_base& stream) {
/* The iword(index) function gives a reference to the index-th custom storage location as a integer */
stream.iword(get_indent_index())--;
return stream;
}
template<class charT, class traits>
basic_ostream<charT, traits>& endl_ind(basic_ostream<charT, traits>& stream) {
int indent = stream.iword(get_indent_index());
stream.put(stream.widen('\n');
while (indent) {
stream.put(stream.widen('\t');
indent--;
}
stream.flush();
return stream;
}
I have combined Bart van Ingen Schenau's solution with a facet, to allow pushing and popping of indentation levels to existing output streams. The code is available on github: https://github.com/spacemoose/ostream_indenter, and there's a more thorough demo/test in the repository, but basically it allows you to do the following:
/// This probably has to be called once for every program:
// http://stackoverflow.com/questions/26387054/how-can-i-use-stdimbue-to-set-the-locale-for-stdwcout
std::ios_base::sync_with_stdio(false);
std::cout << "I want to push indentation levels:\n" << indent_manip::push
<< "To arbitrary depths\n" << indent_manip::push
<< "and pop them\n" << indent_manip::pop
<< "back down\n" << indent_manip::pop
<< "like this.\n" << indent_manip::pop;
To produce:
I want to push indentation levels:
To arbitrary depths
and pop them
back down
like this.
I had to do a kind of nasty trick, so I'm interested in hearing feedback on the codes utility.