dereferencing iterator of STL set - c++

Question

I'm having a problem with inheriting from STL set (i think):
Here is class Prime:
class Prime : public set<A> {
private:
// private data members.
public:
// C'tor...
void printParticularA(const int& id);
}
Here is class A:
class A : public List<B>{
private:
// data members.
int id;
public:
// C'tor
A(const A& copy) : List<B>(copy), //copy data members
{ // validate data and throw exceptions if needed. };
bool operator< (const A& rhs) const{
return id < rhs.id;
}
void printReport() const {
for(const B& item : *this){ item.print(); }
}
}
now here is the problem. in the next function i want to print a particular A object in the set:
void Prime::printParticularA(const int& id) {
find(AFinder(id))->printReport();
}
i also tried this:
void Prime::printParticularA(const int& id) {
*(find(AFinder(id))).printReport();
}
note: assume that class B has print() method.
note2: AFinder is a class for making dummy A objects using only the id data.
the problem is that when 'find' finds the objects it returns const_iterator (because every object in set is const), and when i dereference it i get a copy of the object (??) but the list of B inside it is empty!
this happens also for the '->' version.
now i know that set doesn't allow me to change the objects but i do not intend to change the object (as you can see in the declaration of printReport member function).
i appreciate any help in this!
EDIT: thanks everyone, you have helped me a lot especially learning what not to do.
I solved the problem and it wasn't in set, list nor any of my classes presented here.
my mistake was in understanding the question i was given (yes this is my homework assignment, i'm still new to c++).
sorry if you feel i have wasted your time.
i hope that i can learn from all of your experience and someday help others!
in short, THANKS!! :)

Answer 1

Your code is pretty much messed up all around. And the problem does not look tied directly to set or iterator, but general bad things done.
For starters make your op< const and delete the copy ctor for good -- the stock one shall work fine. Use internal find of set to search and look if it found an item.
All that will likely make your described problem gone, if not, post a complete compileable example with proper text of what you see and what you expect.

Answer 2

Your code really violate many rules of C++. Why don't you try smth like this:
#include <iostream>
#include <list>
#include <map>
using namespace std;
class SimpleInt {
public:
int data_;
SimpleInt(const int data): data_(data) {};
void print() const {cout << data_ << " ";};
};
template <typename T>
class A {
private:
// private data members.
public:
list<T> list_of_B_; // this is for simlicity. Make getters as you need
const int id_; // delete it or copy to map. You sholdn't change it.
A(int id) : list_of_B_(), id_(id) {}
A(const A<T>& copy) : list_of_B_(copy.list_of_B_), id_(copy.id_) {} //copy data members
A(A<T>&& copy) : list_of_B_(::std::move(copy.list_of_B_)), id_(copy.id_) {} //move data members
void printReport() const {
for(const T& item : list_of_B_){ item.print(); }
}
};
template <typename T>
class Prime {
private:
// private data members.
public:
// The main difference with your source
map<int, T> map_of_A_; // this is for simlicity. Make getters as you need
// C'tor...
void printParticularA(const int& id) {
auto it = map_of_A_.find(id);
if (it != map_of_A_.end())
it->second.printReport();
}
};
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
typedef A<SimpleInt> ASimpled;
Prime<ASimpled> prime;
ASimpled a(1);
a.list_of_B_.push_back(SimleInt(1));
a.list_of_B_.push_back(SimleInt(2));
a.list_of_B_.push_back(SimleInt(3));
ASimpled b(2);
b.list_of_B_.push_back(SimleInt(10));
b.list_of_B_.push_back(SimleInt(20));
b.list_of_B_.push_back(SimleInt(30));
prime.map_of_A_.insert(make_pair(a.id_, a));
prime.map_of_A_.insert(make_pair(b.id_, b));
prime.printParticularA(2);
return 0;
}

Answer 3

Although you haven't included the implementation of List the problem is likely there. To be more precise the begin() and end() member functions of List may be broken. Chances are the values they return are identical (or invalid) resulting in the range based for loop doing nothing. This of course is based on your set::find is returning a valid iterator and not the end iterator.
The following example is a modification of the code in your question. It uses std::list instead of List and doesn't use AFinder since you haven't included the code for it.
#include <set>
#include <list>
#include <iostream>
struct B
{
int id_;
explicit B(int id) : id_(id) {}
void print() const
{
std::cout << "B::id = " << id_ << std::endl;
}
};
class A : public std::list<B>
{
public:
explicit A(int id) : id_(id) {}
bool operator<(const A& rhs) const
{
return id_ < rhs.id_;
}
bool operator==(const A& other) const
{
return id_ == other.id_;
}
void printReport() const
{
for(auto& item : *this)
{
item.print();
}
}
private:
// data members.
int id_;
};
class Prime : public std::set<A>
{
public:
void printParticularA(const int& id)
{
std::cout << "finding " << id << std::endl;
auto el = find(A(id));
if(el == cend())
{
std::cout << "not found" << std::endl;
}
else
{
find(A(id))->printReport();
}
std::cout << "done finding " << id << std::endl;
}
};
int main()
{
Prime p;
A a1(1);
a1.push_back(B(1));
a1.push_back(B(2));
a1.push_back(B(3));
p.insert(a1);
A a2(2);
a2.push_back(B(4));
a2.push_back(B(5));
a2.push_back(B(6));
p.insert(a2);
p.printParticularA(1);
p.printParticularA(2);
// doesn't exit
p.printParticularA(3);
}
This produces the following output.
finding 1
B::id = 1
B::id = 2
B::id = 3
done finding 1
finding 2
B::id = 4
B::id = 5
B::id = 6
done finding 2
finding 3
not found
done finding 3