I'm very new to pointers so please bear with me...
My code defines a function for the multiplication of two matrices (matrixMultiplication). I have then defined a function pointer to this function.
#include <iostream>
void matrixMultiplication (const double A[3][3], const double B[3][3], double output[3][3])
{
int i, j, k;
for (i=0;i<3;i++)
{
for(j=0;j<3;j++)
{
for(k=0;k<3;k++)
{
output[i][j]+=A[i][k]*B[k][j];
}
}
}
}
double (*matrixMultiplication (const double (*left)[3], const double (*right)[3]))[3]
{
double output[3][3];
matrixMultiplication(left, right, output);
}
int main ()
{
using namespace std;
double A[3][3]={{1,1,1},{1,1,1},{1,1,1}};
double B[3][3]={{1,1,1},{1,1,1},{1,1,1}};
cout<<"The function returns..."<<endl;
double print[3][3]=matrixMultiplication(A,B);
int i, j;
for (i=0;i<3;i++)
{
for (j=0;j<3;j++)
{
cout<<print[i][j]<<"\t";
}
cout<<"\n";
}
return 0;
}
What I want to do is output the array given by the pointer function, *matrixMultiplication, using a for loop (just for aesthetic purposes). I have played around with the code and ended up with initialiser or segmentation (11) errors. I feel like I'm missing something blatantly obvious given I'm new to C++...
Any ideas would be most welcome!
The problem is with:
double (*matrixMultiplication (const double (*left)[3], const double (*right)[3]))[3]
{
double output[3][3];
matrixMultiplication(left, right, output);
}
I don't know what it is and neither does my compiler! ;)
Using functional, a matrixMultiplication function type can be defined and used, like so:
#include <functional> // or <tr1/functional>
// type
typedef function<void (const double[3][3], const double[3][3], double[3][3])> MatrixFunction;
// instance
MatrixFunction matrixFunctionPtr(&matrixMultiplication);
// call
matrixFunctionPtr(A,B,print);
Note: you also need to declare your output array double print[3][3]; * before* you call the matrixMultiplication function...
You have a function:
void matrixMultiplication (const double A[3][3], const double B[3][3], double output[3][3])
{
...
}
This function works. It takes three arrays as arguments (which is to say it takes three pointers-- this is a subtle point, and I don't think it's a good exercise for a beginner because it clouds the distinction between passing by value and passing by reference -- but never mind that for now) and returns void (i.e. nothing), and . Now you want to construct a function pointer that points to this function. But this:
double (*matrixMultiplication (const double (*left)[3], const double (*right)[3]))[3]
{
...
}
is not a function pointer; it's a function that returns a pointer to an array of double, but it has some internal errors (and don't even worry about what it takes as arguments for now).
Let's do a simpler example first:
double foo(int n) // function
{
return(3);
}
int main()
{
double (*bar)(int); // function pointer
bar = &foo;
double z = (*bar)(5);
cout << z << endl;
return(0);
}
Now that we see how function pointers work, we apply one to matrixMultiplication:
void (*matFP)(const double A[3][3], const double B[3][3], double output[3][3]);
matFP = &matrixMultiplication;
double C[3][3];
(*matFP)(A,B,C);
Related
How do I get the below code example, that compiles and works just fine to work inside a class?
Below code works just fine
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
typedef int (*IntFunctionWithOneParameter) (int a);
int function(int a){ return a; }
int functionTimesTwo(int a){ return a*2; }
int functionDivideByTwo(int a){ return a/2; }
void main()
{
IntFunctionWithOneParameter functions[] =
{
function,
functionTimesTwo,
functionDivideByTwo
};
for(int i = 0; i < 3; ++i)
{
cout << functions[i](8) << endl;
}
}
So the above code works fine, but I want to move it inside a class in a separate file, similar to the below NON-WORKING IDEA, where I get "incomplete type is not allowed" error at "functions[] =";
class myClass {
private:
typedef int (*IntFunctionWithOneParameter) (int a);
int function(int a){ return a; }
int functionTimesTwo(int a){ return a*2; }
int functionDivideByTwo(int a){ return a/2; }
IntFunctionWithOneParameter functions[] =
{
function,
functionTimesTwo,
functionDivideByTwo
};
};
So my question is how can I get it to work inside my class, where it is the ONLY place the functions are needed, meaning I do need to access the functions in main() or other places!
EDIT
Here is why I need an "array of functions". To save time spent on "if's" or more exactly "switches" as I am making a software (vst) synthesizer, and the less time spent in the processing, the more notes (polyphonic) the user can play at any given time. And multiply the 44100 times per second the function is run, with 8 tone generators, which each can have up to 16 unison voices, so actually the function needed, may be called up to 5,644,800 times per second, per note played! The exact function needed inside this main loop is known BEFORE entering loop, and ONLY changes when the user adjust a knob, so I do want to avoid ifs and switches. Now had it only been one function that occasionally changes, i could just duplicate main loop with variations for each function possible, HOWEVER the main audio processing loop, has several areas, each with a variety of ever growing functions possible, each which ONLY changes when user changes various knobs. So although I could, I am not going to make 5 * 20 * 23 (and growing) different versions of a main loop, to avoid if's and switches.
There's a bunch of things wrong with the code that you posted:
No semicolon after class definition.
Class instead of class
No fixed size set for the functions member, which is not allowed. You need to explicitly set the size of the array.
Member function pointers are not the same as "regular" function pointers. Member function pointers have an implicit this as first argument, since they need an object to be invoked on. So myFunction is not of type myArrayOfFunctions. If you make myFunction and myFunction2 static, then they can be stored as regular function pointers. Is this an option?
The name myArrayOfFunctions is very confusing, since it's not an array at all.
All but the last of these will cause your code not to compile.
This example may be what you've needed.
Note: I've changed typedef statement to using and changed function's signatures to take in plain int for testing convinience sake.
class myClass {
public:
using myArrayOfFunctions = float(myClass::*)(int a, int b, float c);
float myFunction1 (int a, int b, float c)
{
return a * b * c;
}
float myFunction2 (int a, int b, float c)
{
return a + b + c;
}
myArrayOfFunctions functions[2];
myClass()
{
functions[0] = &myClass::myFunction1;
functions[1] = &myClass::myFunction2;
};
void Invoke()
{
(this->*functions[0])(1, 2, 3);
(this->*functions[1])(3, 2, 1);
}
};
int main()
{
myClass a;
a.Invoke();
(a.*(a.functions[0]))(4, 5, 6);
return 0;
}
As you see, I'm getting the pointer to the class function but to call it I need to call it with an actual object (this in invoke() function and a object in main()).
You can write this:
class myClass
{
public:
typedef float (*myArrayOfStaticFunctions) (int& a, int& b, float& c);
typedef float (myClass::*myArrayOfFunctions) (int& a, int& b, float& c);
static float myFunction1 (int& a, int& b, float& c){cout<<"myFunction1"<<endl; return 0;}
static float myFunction2 (int& a, int& b, float& c){ cout<<"myFunction2"<<endl; return 0;}
float myFunction3 (int& a, int& b, float& c){ cout<<"myFunction3"<<endl; return 0;}
float myFunction4 (int& a, int& b, float& c){ cout<<"myFunction4"<<endl; return 0;}
myArrayOfStaticFunctions StaticArrayfunctions[2];
myArrayOfFunctions Arrayfunctions[2];
myClass (){
StaticArrayfunctions [0] =myFunction1;
StaticArrayfunctions [1] =myFunction2;
Arrayfunctions [0] = &myClass::myFunction3;
Arrayfunctions [1] = &myClass::myFunction4;
}
};
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
myClass m;
int a =0, b=0; float c;
m.StaticArrayfunctions[0] (a,b,c);
m.StaticArrayfunctions[1] (a,b,c);
myClass::myArrayOfFunctions func3 = m.Arrayfunctions[0];
myClass::myArrayOfFunctions func4 = m.Arrayfunctions[1];
(m.*func3)(a,b,c);
(m.*func4)(a,b,c);
return 0;
}
I'm trying to pass function of multiple arguments to other function. I know how to pass a function of single argument function to other function as it was described in C++ primer plus book.
However, I get an error when I'm trying to pass multiple arguments with class(poly_3d) to NR_method function.
#include <iostream>
#define log(x) std::cout<<x<<std::endl;
class constants {
public:
double A;
double B;
double C;
};
double poly_3d(double x, constants cst);
double NR_method(double a, double(*poly_3d)(double));
int main() {
constants cst;
cst.A = 2;
cst.B = -8;
cst.C = 10;
NR_method(3.2, poly_3d);
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
double poly_3d(double x, constants cst) {
double y = 3 * cst.A*x*x + 2 * cst.B*x + cst.C;
return y;
}
double NR_method(double a, double (*poly_3d)(double)) {
double c = (*poly_3d)(a);
return c;
}
So the error I'm getting is from NR_method(3.2, poly_3d) in main function. I know that if poly_3d was single arg, this would work.
If this is a horrible way to write codes, then any directions towards learning C++ more effectively for newbies would be much appreciated! Thanks
Take a look at the following code. We're using a template to make things look nicer.
#include <iostream>
#define log(x) std::cout<<x<<std::endl;
class constants {
public:
double A;
double B;
double C;
};
/// Note that we take a ref now, no need to copy cst.
double poly_3d(double x, constants & cst)
{
double y = 3 * cst.A*x*x + 2 * cst.B*x + cst.C;
return y;
}
/// Note that we take a ref now, no need to copy cst.
template <class F>
double NR_method(double a, constants & cst, F func)
{
return func(a, cst);
}
int main() {
constants cst;
cst.A = 2;
cst.B = -8;
cst.C = 10;
NR_method(3.2, cst, &poly_3d);
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
You are declaring the function poly_3d with 2 arguments but passing only one. I made a few changes on the code for you
#include <iostream>
#define log(x) std::cout<<x<<std::endl;
class constants {
public:
double A;
double B;
double C;
};
double poly_3d(double x, constants cst);
double NR_method(double a, constants cst, double(*poly_3d)(double, constants));
int main() {
constants cst;
cst.A = 2;
cst.B = -8;
cst.C = 10;
printf("%f", NR_method(3.2, cst, poly_3d));
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
double poly_3d(double x, constants cst) {
double y = 3 * cst.A*x*x + 2 * cst.B*x + cst.C;
return y;
}
double NR_method(double a, constants cst, double (*poly)(double, constants)) {
return (*poly)(a, cst);
}
Let's start by simplifying your code. (A minimal example removes distractions, allowing you to better focus on the actual issue.) It looks like you started to do this, but it can be taken further. After removing some stuff that is not needed to reproduce the compile error:
class constants {};
double poly_3d(double x, constants cst);
double NR_method(double a, double(*poly_3d)(double));
int main() {
NR_method(3.2, poly_3d);
}
double poly_3d(double x, constants /*cst*/) {
return 3 * x;
}
double NR_method(double a, double (*poly_3d)(double)) {
return (*poly_3d)(a);
}
Now let's look at the error message:
error: invalid conversion from 'double (*)(double, constants)' to 'double (*)(double)'
This comes with an indication that the conversion is from poly_3d to the second argument of NR_method. If you look at those things, yes, that is the conversion you requested. The argument list for poly_3d is (double, constant), while the declared argument list for the second argument is just (double). There is a mismatch, which makes the conversion invalid. It's not all that different from the single-parameter case: the signatures must match. You can solve this by changing the argument's signature to math that of poly_3d.
Now, if you just make the signatures match, there is another problem in that NR_method does not have a constants value available. That is probably a logical error for you to work out. For a quick workaround to show the elimination of the compiler error, I'll add a local variable.
class constants {
};
double poly_3d(double x, constants cst);
double NR_method(double a, double(*poly_3d)(double, constants)); // <-- Desired signature
int main() {
NR_method(3.2, poly_3d);
}
double poly_3d(double x, constants /*cst*/) {
return 3.0 * x;
}
double NR_method(double a, double (*poly_3d)(double, constants)) {
constants cst; // <-- Allows this to compile, but probably not what you want.
return (*poly_3d)(a, cst); // <-- Needed a second parameter here.
}
There are ways to make this work nicer (for example, a std::function may be more convenient than a function pointer), but explaining those would fall outside the scope of this question, especially since some decisions would depend on the bigger picture.
This might be a stupid simple thing I'm overlooking, but I am setting values in the Data::Data(char *DataType...) function as they are being passed in, and as I hover over them, they are setting fine (the variables type, material, ID, unit, reading when hovered over are what they should be).
However, when the getData function is called below, when I hover over the pointer arguments(*type, *materials.. etc) they are set to random strings like directory names and file names. I'm not sure why this is happening, because when the variables are being set above they are right.
I've included the header and implementation files for the Data class, where all of these functions are defined, but If I need include where they are being called please let me know, the only reason I didn't is because the calls are short and files are filled with other irrelevant stuff. Thanks
Data.cpp
#include "Data.hpp"
Sensor::Sensor(char *DataType, char *Material, int ID, char *Sensor, double Min, double Max) {
strcpy(type, Type);
strcpy(material, Material);
ID = SIDs;
strcpy(unit, Units);
max = Maxs;
min = Mins;
}
Sensor::Sensor() {}
double Data::generateData() {
reading = min + (rand() % (int)(max - min + 1));
return reading;
}
void Data::getData(char *type, char *material, int *ID, char *unit, double *reading) {
return;
}
Data::~Data(){}
Data.hpp
#ifndef Data_hpp
#define Data_hpp
#include
#include
#include
using namespace std;
class Data
{
public:
Data();
Data(char *Type, char *Material, int ID, char *Unit, double Min, double Max);
~Data();
void getData(char *type, char *material, int *ID, char *unit, double *reading);
private:
char type[32];
char material[32];
int ID;
int reading;
char unit[32];
double min;
double max;
double generateData();
};
#endif
Your implementation of Sensor::getData does not do what you think it does.
Let's look at this class:
class Foo
{
void getX(int* x)
{
}
int* x;
};
Within getX, the parameter x hides the member x of the same name. This function does literally nothing: A user passes a pointer to an int, which gets the name x in this function. The member is not automatically copied into there (which would be surprising, since you could name the parameter anything else). If you want to do that, you must do it explicitly:
void getX(int* x)
{
*x = *this->x; // Pointed-to value is copied
//x = this->x; // Pointer is copied
}
If you do not set the function parameter to anything, the pointer will keep pointing to random garbage in memory, which is what you are seeing in your debugger.
The more common way to denote "this parameter will be changed/set by this function" is passing a reference:
class Foo
{
void get(char*& x, int*& y, double& z)
{
x = this->x; // Now both parameter and member point to the same location.
y = this->y; // Now both parameter and member point to the same location.
z = this->z;
}
char x[32];
int* y;
double z;
};
Or, if you don't want to copy the pointers but the pointed-to values:
void get(char* x, int* y, double& z)
{
strcopy(x, this->x);
*y = *this->y;
z = this->z;
}
(PS: I recommend using std::string instead of char arrays if your use case allows for it.)
You uninitialized arguments are set to random garbage no matter if you call getData() or not. Try to print them out without calling getData() and see.
Abstract
I have a class that stores a optimization problem and runs a solver on that problem.
If the solver fails I want to consider a sub-problem and solve using the same solver (and class).
Introduction
An optimization problem is essencially a lot of (mathematical) functions. The problem functions are defined outside the class, but the sub-problem functions are defined inside the class, so they have different types (e.g. void (*) and void (MyClass::*).
At first I thought that I could cast the member function to the non-member pointer-to-function type, but I found out that I cannot. So I'm searching for some other way.
Example Code
An example code to simulate my issue:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
typedef void (*ftype) (int, double);
// Suppose foo is from another file. Can't change the definition
void foo (int n, double x) {
cout << "foo: " << n*x << endl;
}
class TheClass {
private:
double value;
ftype m_function;
void print (int n, double x) {
m_function(size*n, value*x);
}
public:
static int size;
TheClass () : value(1.2), m_function(0) { size++; }
void set_function (ftype p) { m_function = p; }
void call_function() {
if (m_function) m_function(size, value);
}
void call_ok_function() {
TheClass ok_class;
ok_class.set_function(foo);
ok_class.call_function();
}
void call_nasty_function() {
TheClass nasty_class;
// nasty_class.set_function(print);
// nasty_class.set_function(&TheClass::print);
nasty_class.call_function();
}
};
int TheClass::size = 0;
int main () {
TheClass one_class;
one_class.set_function(foo);
one_class.call_function();
one_class.call_ok_function();
one_class.call_nasty_function();
}
As the example suggests, the member function can't be static. Also, I can't redefine the original problem function to receive an object.
Thanks for any help.
Edit
I forgot to mention. I tried changing to std::function, but my original function has more than 10 arguments (It is a Fortran subroutine).
Solution
I made the change to std::function and std::bind as suggested, but did not went for the redesign of a function with more 10 arguments. I decided to create an intermediate function. The following code illustrates what I did, but with fewer variables. Thanks to all.
#include <iostream>
#include <boost/tr1/functional.hpp>
using namespace std;
class TheClass;
typedef tr1::function<void(int *, double *, double *, double *)> ftype;
// Suppose foo is from another file. Can't change the definition
void foo (int n, int m, double *A, double *x, double *b) {
// Performs matrix vector multiplication x = A*b, where
// A is m x n
}
void foo_wrapper (int DIM[], double *A, double *x, double *b) {
foo(DIM[0], DIM[1], A, x, b);
}
class TheClass {
private:
ftype m_function;
void my_function (int DIM[], double *A, double *x, double *b) {
// Change something before performing MV mult.
m_function(DIM, A, x, b);
}
public:
void set_function (ftype p) { m_function = p; }
void call_function() {
int DIM[2] = {2,2};
if (m_function) m_function(DIM, 0, 0, 0);
}
void call_nasty_function() {
TheClass nasty_class;
ftype f = tr1::bind(&TheClass::my_function, this, _1, _2, _3, _4);
nasty_class.set_function(f);
nasty_class.call_function();
}
};
int main () {
TheClass one_class;
one_class.set_function(foo_wrapper);
one_class.call_function();
one_class.call_nasty_function();
}
PS. Creating a std::function with more than 10 variables seemed possible (compiled, but I didn't test) with
#define BOOST_FUNCTION_NUM_ARGS 15
#include <boost/function/detail/maybe_include.hpp>
#undef BOOST_FUNCTION_NUM_ARGS
But creating a std::bind for more than 10 arguments does not seem as easy.
std::function, std::bind, and lambdas are what you are looking for. In short, function pointers are very bad things and should be burned in fire. In long, std::function can store any function object which can be called with the correct signature, and you can use std::bind or a lambda to generate a function object that calls your member function quickly and easily.
Edit: Then you will just have to roll your own std::function equivalent that supports more than 10 arguments.
i can't understand following defining pointer variable. can you help me?
double(*)(double *) foo;
note : sory, i edit name of variable func to foo.
This is not valid C. Perhaps you mean this:
double(*func)(double *);
which declares func as a pointer to a function that takes a pointer-to-double, and returns a double.
You can use http://cdecl.org for this sort of thing.
Try this (tested):
// functions that take double * and return double
double dfunc(double *d) { return (*d) * 2.0; }
double tfunc(double *d) { return (*d) * 3.0; }
int main()
{
double val = 3.0;
double // 3. the function returns double
(*pFunc) // 1. it's a pointer to a function
(double *); // 2. the function takes double *
pFunc = dfunc;
printf("%f\n", pFunc(&val)); // calls dfunc()
pFunc = tfunc;
printf("%f\n", pFunc(&val)); // calls tfunc()
}
Output:
6.000000
9.000000
it's a pointer to a function returning double having a parameter of type pointer to double, if you correct the variable declaration since as it stands its just incorrect correct syntax would be double (*foo) (double*)
uses are polymorphism by being able to replace a function:
struct memory_manager{
void*(*getmem)(size_t);
void(*freemem)(void*);
}mem_man;
void* always_fail(size_t){return 0;}
void* myalloc(size_t s){
void* p=mem_man.get_mem(s);
if(p) return p;
mem_man.getmem=always_fail;
return 0;
}
void myfree(void* p){
if(p) freemem(p);
}
it's not really the c++-way i geuss, since for most purposes inheritance and virtual functions offer a better solution, but if you're restricted to c, then you can use this technique to simulate virtual functions.