Good Node definition for ordered tree in C++ - c++

Question

I have a rooted ordered tree representing sets of integers. Each node stores the size of the associated subtree, and also the max and min elements in this subtree. The branch degree of all the nodes if fixed (but determined at runtime). Also for sufficiently small subtrees I would like to change the representation to a bitmap for the subset associated. For example the root node may store a set of size 1000000, one of this children would store a subset of size 100000, then again one of his children would store a subset of size 10000 and in the next level we would stop using this representation and store just a plain bitmap for the associated subset.
I'm trying to implement this structure in C++ and my definition for the node type stores three integers (size, min and max), an array of pointers (something like node_t ** children) to subtrees and the bitmap (in case we are using this representation). The problem is that all the nodes are storing at least one element which is irrelevant (if the set is big enough we would be using the array of pointers but not the bitmap, for example). How should the node type be declared to solve this problem ? I thought about using two subtypes of node (one for each case) but I am not sure what the impact on the performance at runtime would be.
Thanks in advance.
PS. Please let me know if the question is unclear to edit it.

Answer 1

Since you're using multiple representations, you'll probably need at least two node types: The first will be a generic node that handles the root as well as nearby descendants, and the second type will contain a pointer to a map. The latter nodes don't have any children persay, but their immediate ancestors should see them as an entire sub-tree rather than a terminating node that points to a map.
Since each of the upper nodes have pointers to their children, you'll need a way to ensure that these pointers are also able to point to the mapNodes as well as the branching ones. A good way to do this is to create a virtual base node type with a virtual function that returns whatever data you're looking for. For example:
class baseNode {
virtual int getLargest();
virtual baseNode* addData(int);
};
class leafNode : baseNode { //for non-map termination
leafNode(int in) {Data = in;}
int getLargest() {return Data;}
baseNode* addData(int);
int Data;
};
class treeNode : baseNode {
public:
int getLargest(); //returns leftChild->getLargest(), etc
baseNode* addData(int);
baseNode* leftChild;//can point to either a treeNode or mapNode
baseNode* rightChild;
};
class mapNode : baseNode {
baseNode* addData(int);
int getLargest(); //parses subMap to find/return the desired value
Map* subMap;
};
You'll need a bit of finessing to get it to do what you need it to, but the principle is the same. Keep in mind that with 1m objects, every byte you add increases the net memory use by about a megabyte, so do try to keep things minimal. If all of your branching nodes eventually reach a mapNode, you can eliminate the leafNode declaration altogether.
Adding data to the structure is tricky, especially since you're working with multiple types and the parents (hopefully) don't know anything about their neighbors; Use virtual accessors to do what's needed. In many scenarios, if a branching node tries to add a value 'down the line', the child node it references may need to change type. In this case, the child should construct the new substructure then return it to the parent. This can be done like so:
baseNode* treeNode::addData(int in) {
if ((childCount+1) < threshold) { //not enough to merit a map
//....
//if (input needs to go to the leftChild) {
if (leftChild == 0) {
leftChild = new leafNode(in);
} else {
leftChild = leftChild->addData(in);
}
//}
return (baseNode*)this; //casting may be optional
} else { //new Data merits converting self + kids into a map
mapNode* newMap = new mapNode();
//Set newMap->subMap to children, deleting as you go
delete this;//remove self after return
return (baseNode*)newMap; //return the mapNode holding subtree
}
}
baseNode* leafNode::addData(int in) {
treeNode* tmpNode = new treeNode(); //create replacement
tmpNode->leftChild = this; //pin self to new node
tmpNode->rightChild = new leafNode(in); //store data
return (baseNode*)tmpNode;
}
baseNode* mapNode::addData(int in) {
subMap->addValue(in);//However you do it...
return (baseNode*)this; //parent is always a treeNode
}
The leftChild = leftChild->addData(in); usually won't actually modify anything, especially if it points to a treeNode, however it doesn't really hurt anything to do so and the extra if (newPtr != leftChild) check would just add unnecessary overhead. Note that it will cause a change if a leafNode needs to change into a treeNode with multiple kids, or if it's a treeNode with enough children to merit changing itself (and it's kids!) into a mapNode.