No matching constructor for initialization of - c++

I’ve seen similar questions on StackOverflow, but none of them seems to apply to me.
Here is my code:
Option.cpp
#include "Option.h"
Option::Option(string valueName, string description, OptionType type){
this->valueName = valueName;
this->description = description;
this->type = type;
};
Option.h
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
enum OptionType { FLAG, REQUIRED, NORMAL };
class Option {
string valueName, description, value;
OptionType type;
public:
Option(string valueName, string description, OptionType type);
void setValue(string value) {
this->value = value;
};
string getValueName() {
return this->valueName;
};
string getDescription() {
return this->description;
};
OptionType getType() {
return this->type;
};
};
Options.cpp
#include "Options.h"
using namespace std;
Options::Options(int _argc, const char * _argv[]) : argv(_argv) {
this->argc = _argc;
}
Options::~Options() {
options.~unordered_map();
}
void Options::printHelp() {
for (auto &i : options) {
cout << i.first << '\t' << i.second.getDescription() << '\n';
}
}
void Options::addFlag(string flagName, string description) {
}
void Options::addOption(string optionName, string valueName, string description, OptionType type) {
Option option(valueName, description, type);
options[optionName]=option;
}
void Options::addOptionAlias(string aliasName, string optionName) {
}
Options.h
#include <iostream>
#include <unordered_map>
#include "Option.h"
using namespace std;
class Options {
unordered_map<string, Option> options;
int argc;
const char ** argv;
public:
Options(int argc, const char * argv[]);
~Options();
void parse();
void addOption(string optionName, string valueName, string description, OptionType type);
void addFlag(string flagName, string description);
void addOptionAlias(string aliasName, string optionName);
void getOption(string optionName);
void printHelp();
};
It's in options.cpp on the line Option option(valueName, description, type); that the error seems to stem from, but for the life of me, I can’t figure out why. As far as I can see, the constructor in Option takes the right types.

The problem is actually in the next line:
options[optionName]=option;
That first calls the operator[] in the map, that searchs for the given key and returns the associated value. If the key is not found, it insert a default initialized value connected to that key. Then this value is copy assigned with your option.
Do you see the problem? Your Option class does not have a default constructor, so it cannot be default initialized! Read carefully your error message, surely it is talking about the default constructor, not the one you are looking at.
You have several solutions. The easiest would be to write a default constructor for your class.
The alternative would be never to use operator[] in the map so that the default constructor is never needed. If that's what you want to do, to insert an item you write:
options.insert(std::make_pair(optionName, option));
Finally, if you are using C++11 (or later) and a compliant enough compiler, you can even build the object directly into the container: zero copy overhead and you don't even need the copy constructor!
options.emplace(std::piecewise_construct,
std::forward_as_tuple(optionName),
std::forward_as_tuple(valueName, description, type));

There's a mismatch between the declaration of the constructor in the header and the definition in the source file.
In header...
Option(string& valueName, string& description, OptionType& type);
In source file...
Option::Option(string valueName, string description, OptionType type){
Notice the parameters are defined as references (e.g., string&) in the header, but as objects (e.g., string) in the source.

Related

No declaration matches in Codelite IDE

I have been looking in different threads with this error which is quite common but it feels like the IDE I am using messed with my workspace and I can't quite find the problem. I am setting up an extremely basic class called "Movie" that is specified below:
Movie.hpp :
#ifndef MOVIE_HPP
#define MOVIE_HPP
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using std::string, std::cout,std::size_t;
class Movie
{
private:
std::string name;
std::string rating;
int watched_ctr;
public:
Movie(const string& name, const string& rating, int watched_ctr);
~Movie();
//getters
string get_name() const;
string get_rating() const;
int get_watched() const;
//setters
void set_name(string name);
void set_rating(string rating);
void set_watched(int watched_ctr);
};
#endif // MOVIE_HPP
Movie.cpp:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include "Movie.hpp"
using std::string, std::cout,std::size_t,std::endl;
Movie::Movie(const string& name, const string& rating, int watched_ctr)
: name(name) , rating(rating) , watched_ctr(watched_ctr) {
}
Movie::~Movie()
{
cout << "Destructor for Movies class called /n";
}
//Getters
string Movie::get_name(){return name;}
string Movie::get_rating(){return rating;}
string Movie::get_watched(){return watched_ctr;}
//Setters
void Movie::set_name(std::string n){this -> name = n;}
void Movie::set_rating(std::string rating){this -> rating = rating;}
void Movie::set_watched(int ctr){this -> watched_ctr = ctr;}
The main.cpp I am trying only consists in creating one Movie object:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include "Movie.hpp"
using std::string, std::cout,std::size_t,std::endl;
int main()
{
Movie StarTrek("Star Trek", "G", 20);
}
As you can see, I set all the attribute to private in order to exercise with the set/get methods but I keep stumbling upon the same error on each of them stating >"C:/Users/.../ProjectsAndTests/MoviesClass/Movie.cpp:18:8: error: no declaration matches 'std::__cxx11::string Movie::get_name()"
if you could give me a hint on what might cause this error I would greatly appreciate thank you!
I tried opening another workspace with classes implemented inside of them and the syntax I am using is very close from this test workspace I opened which compiled fine (no error regarding declaration match).
There are 2 problems with your code.
First while defining the member functions outside class you're not using the const. So to solve this problem we must use const when defining the member function outside the class.
Second, the member function Movie::get_watched() is declared with the return type of string but while defining that member function you're using the return type int. To solve this, change the return type while defining the member function to match the return type in the declaration.
//----------------------vvvvv--------->added const
string Movie::get_name()const
{
return name;
}
string Movie::get_rating()const
{
return rating;
}
vvv------------------------------>changed return type to int
int Movie::get_watched()const
{
return watched_ctr;
}
Working demo

How can i access to any data that is in private section of class?

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
class Test
{
private:
int ID;
string name;
public:
Test(int ID, string name);
};
Test::Test(int ID, string name)
{
this->ID = ID;
this->name = name;
}
int main()
{
vector<Test *> test_vect;
Test *ptr = new Test(100, "John");
test_vect.push_back(ptr);
cout << ptr->ID << endl;
return 0;
}
This is a simple code I'm trying.
I want to access to the data that I stored in vector.
I thought it would be accessible by using -> just like vector of struct but I can't. So I want to know how to load the data in class.
In addition, I thought sending data to heap section using new would make it accessible at any time I want regardless of whether it is private or public, but it seems like it is not possible.
Can you explain how it works?
(I don't even fully understand how class work, so detailed explanation would be very appreciated. Thx!)
A private variable cannot be accessed by code outside the class definition. (There are exceptions with friend)
ptr->ID does not work because main is outside the class definition.
This can be fixed by using a getter method.
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
class Test
{
private:
int _ID;
string _name;
public:
int ID() {return _ID;}
string name() {return _name;}
Test(int param_ID, string param_name);
};
Test::Test(int param_ID, string param_name)
{
_ID = param_ID;
_name = param_name;
}
int main()
{
vector<Test *> test_vect;
Test *ptr = new Test(100, "John");
test_vect.push_back(ptr);
cout << ptr->ID() << endl;
return 0;
}
The above example shows the getter methods ID() and name() which return the data members _ID and _name respectively.
ID() is allowed to access _ID because ID() is part of the class definition. name() is allowed to access _name because name() is part of the class definition.
Note: I would still consider this code to be flawed because it creates a new object on the heap, but does not delete it. You should also look up the keywords new and delete to see how they operate together.

type_info referencing deleted function

I'm trying to write a class, that stores configuration items with their name, a description and their types.
OptionItem.h:
#include <typeinfo>
#include <string>
class OptionItem {
public:
OptionItem(std::string name, std::string text, type_info type);
std::string name() const;
std::string text() const;
type_info OptionItem::type() const;
private:
std::string _name, _text;
type_info _type;
};
OptionItem.cpp:
OptionItem::OptionItem(std::string name, std::string text, type_info type) :
_name(name), _text(text), _type(type) {};
std::string OptionItem::name() const { return _name; }
std::string OptionItem::text() const { return _text; }
type_info OptionItem::type() const { return _type; }
I have a second class that holds the different options:
Opt.h:
#include "OptionItem.h"
struct Opt {
static const OptionItem opt1, opt2;
};
Opt.cpp:
#include "myOwnClass.h"
const OptionItem Opt::opt1= OptionItem("Option 1", "text1", typeid(std::string));
const OptionItem Opt::opt2= OptionItem("Option 2", "text2", typeid(myOwnClass));
A third class that held the actual settings of my program would then look like this:
Settings.h
#include "OptionItem"
#include <any>
#include <map>
#include <string>
class Settings {
public:
void setOption(OptionItem option, std::any value);
template<class T> T& getOption(const std::string &option) const;
private:
std::map<std::string, std::any> _options;
}
Settings.cpp
void Settings::setOption(OptionItem option, std::any value) {
_options.emplace(option.name(), value);
}
T& Settings::getOption(const std::string &option) const {
if (_options.find(option) == _options.end()) {
throw(std::runtime_error("No such option \"" + option + "\"
}
else {
return std::any_cast<T>(_options[option]);
}
}
A call to Settings::getOption might look like this:
getOption<Opt::opt1.type()>(Opt::opt1.name())
I know this has its problems (which is, why I'm asking :-) ) the first one being that std::type_info doesn't seem to be copyable. (the compiler(VIsualCPP) tells me 'type_info::type_info(const type_info &)': attempting to reference a deleted function). The other problem, of which I am sure there are plenty I don't know about since compilation stops with the aforementioned error.
Do you have any suggestions how I could make this work?

Using a string before .getName(); for c++

I would like to use a string before .getName()
Enemy Troll(Troll, 250, 30);
string enemyName;
enemyName = Troll;
enemyName.getName(); //this is causing the error... "No member named 'setHP' in 'std::__1::basic_string<char>'"
I want to be able to get the same results as using Troll.getName(); but instead use a string.
There is no built in way in C++ to use a string to look up a variable of the same name in C++.
What you have to do is create the appropriate data structure for yourself. One way to do that would be to use a map.
#include <map>
std::map<std::string, Enemy> my_map;
...
Enemy trump("Trump", 250, 30);
my_map["Trump"] = trump;
...
std::string name = ...;
Enemy some_enemy = my_map[name];
You can store all the instances by name as a static data member in a map for example. But there should be better ways to do it depending on the complete design of your program. But since you didn't provide all the context I'm just going to show a generic example. With some issues like non thread safety, missing null checks, not dealing with duplicates, etc.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <map>
using namespace std;
class Enemy{
public:
std::string m_name;
int m_hp;
int m_dmg;
static std::map<std::string,Enemy*> s_instances;
Enemy(const std::string& name, int hp, int dmg)
: m_name(name),
m_hp(hp),
m_dmg(dmg)
{
s_instances[name] = this;
}
~Enemy()
{
s_instances.erase(m_name);
}
const std::string& getName() const
{
return m_name;
}
static Enemy* getInstanceByName(const std::string& name)
{
Enemy* result = nullptr;
auto iter = s_instances.find(name);
if(iter!=s_instances.end()) result = iter->second;
return result;
}
};
std::map<std::string,Enemy*> Enemy::s_instances;
void doStuff()
{
Enemy* instance = Enemy::getInstanceByName("Ork");
std::cout << instance->getName();
}
int main() {
Enemy ork("Ork",300,20);
doStuff();
return 0;
}

Enum in a class with strings

I'm trying to implement a class (C++) with an enum (with the permitted parameters). I got a working solution, but if I try to extend the functionality I get stuck.
Header data_location.hpp
class DataLocation
{
private:
public:
enum Params { model, period };
std::string getParamString(Params p);
};
Program data_location.cpp
string DataLocation::getParamString(Params p){
static const char * ParamsStrings[] = {"MODEL", "PERIOD"};
return ParamsStrings[p];
}
The array ParamsStrings should be generally available in the class, because I need a second method (with inverse function) returning the enum value given a string.
If I try to define the array in the header I get the error:
in-class initialization of static data member ‘const char* DataLocation::ParamsStrings []’ of incomplete type
Why is the type incomplete? The compiler is for sure able to counts the strings in the array, isn't it?
In case there is no way to get my code working, is there an other way? With 1) no XML; 2) no double definition of the strings; 3) not outside the class; 4) no in code programmed mapping.
In class (header) use keyword static and initialize it outside (.cpp) without the static keyword:
class DataLocation {
public:
enum Params { model, period };
string getParamString(Params p);
static const char* ParamsStrings[];
// ^^^^^^
};
const char* DataLocation::ParamsStrings[] = {"MODEL", "BLLBLA"};
//^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The code you have posted is perfectly fine.
Here's the proof:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
struct DataLocation
{
enum Params { model, period };
std::string getParamString(Params p){
static const char * ParamsStrings[] = {"MODEL", "PERIOD"};
return ParamsStrings[p];
}
};
int main()
{
auto a = DataLocation();
std::cout << a.getParamString(DataLocation::model) << std::endl;
return 0;
}
The error message you are getting is not to do with definition of a static data member in an inline function - that's allowed.
There's something else you're not showing us.
The main issue in my question (the second part) was that if I split the class in .hpp and .cpp the definition of the array (I mixed *char and string) has also to be split:
// data_location.hpp
class DataLocation {
static const char * ParamsStrings[];
}
// data_location.cpp
const char * ParamsStrings[] = {"MODEL", "PERIOD"};
At the end I introduced a consistency check to be sure that the number of values in enum growths as the number of strings. Because the array in C++ is somehow limited I had to go for a std::vector (to get the size).
Code for data_location.hpp
#ifndef DATA_LOCATION_HPP_
#define DATA_LOCATION_HPP_
#include <string>
#include "utils/dictionary.hpp"
extern const char* ENV_DATA_ROOT;
struct EDataLocationInconsistency : std::runtime_error
{
using std::runtime_error::runtime_error;
};
struct EDataLocationNotValidParam : std::runtime_error
{
using std::runtime_error::runtime_error;
};
class DataLocation
{
private:
std::string mRootLocation;
static const std::vector<std::string> msParamsStrings;
static bool msConsistenceCheckDone;
public:
DataLocation();
std::string getRootLocation();
std::string getLocation(Dictionary params);
enum Params { model, period, LAST_PARAM};
std::string Param2String(Params p);
Params String2Param(std::string p);
};
#endif
Code for data_location.cpp
#include "data_location.hpp"
#include <string>
#include <cstdlib>
using namespace std;
const char* ENV_DATA_ROOT = "DATA_ROOT";
bool DataLocation::msConsistenceCheckDone = false;
DataLocation::DataLocation() {
mRootLocation = std::getenv(ENV_DATA_ROOT);
if (not msConsistenceCheckDone) {
msConsistenceCheckDone = true;
if (LAST_PARAM+1 != msParamsStrings.size()) {
throw(EDataLocationInconsistency("DataLocation: Check Params and msParamsStrings"));
}
}
}
string DataLocation::getRootLocation() {
return mRootLocation;
}
string DataLocation::getLocation(Dictionary params) {
// to do
return "";
}
const vector<string> DataLocation::msParamsStrings = { "MODEL", "PERIOD", ""};
string DataLocation::Param2String(Params p) {
if (p>=msParamsStrings.size()) {
throw(EDataLocationNotValidParam("Parameter not found"));
}
return msParamsStrings[p];
}
DataLocation::Params DataLocation::String2Param(string p) {
for (int i = 0; i < msParamsStrings.size(); i++) {
if (p == msParamsStrings[i])
return (Params)i;
}
throw(EDataLocationNotValidParam("Parameter not found"));
}
And also a unit test:
#include <boost/test/unit_test.hpp>
#include "data_location.hpp"
#include <string>
using namespace std;
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE( data_location )
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_CASE(data_location_1) {
DataLocation dl;
auto s = dl.getRootLocation();
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(s, "/home/tc/data/forex" );
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(dl.Param2String(DataLocation::period),"PERIOD");
BOOST_CHECK_EQUAL(dl.String2Param("PERIOD"),DataLocation::period);
BOOST_CHECK_THROW(dl.String2Param("SOMETHING"), EDataLocationNotValidParam);
BOOST_CHECK_THROW(dl.Param2String((DataLocation::Params)100), EDataLocationNotValidParam);
}
BOOST_AUTO_TEST_SUITE_END()
C++ is very picky about what it will let you initialize inside of a class definition; there are some particularly non-intuitive rules surrounding static members. It all has to do with the ODR, and why all the rules are the way they are is not especially important.
To cut to the chase, making your array a static constexpr const member should shut the compiler up. With the C++11 standard, the restrictions were relaxed a bit, and one of the new stipulations was that static constexpr members can be initialized inline. This is perfect for your application, since the strings in your array are compile-time constants.
The recent g++ compiler which support C++0x or later compiles thus code. Pure C compile compiles, too. Because strings in initialization like {"MODEL", "PERIOD"}; implemented as const char * pointer to the char array.