There was a highly rated response in a question about header ordering with the following suggestion:
Good practice: every .h file should have a .cpp that includes that .h first before anything else. This proves that any .h file can be put first.
Even if the header requires no implementation, you make a .cpp that just includes that .h file and nothing else.
Personally I've never had a problem with include ordering for headers that don't have a corresponding cpp file. What kinds of problems does this best practice prevent?
The header file should compile on itself. ie. for testing make a .cpp file that just includes the header file.
The header file should be guarded by the pre-processor. if #ifndef etc...
Both these will ensure that the order will not matter.
One problem it solves is allowing the .h file to be linted (at least by my lint tools). Without a .cpp doing an include of an .h my template code gets skipped.
Related
I have a few queries regarding the design principle of laying out a C++ header and source files:
I have recently taken over a project in which the previous programmer used to have this, which is particularly annoying because I read somewhere that we shouldn't include a .cpp file in a .hpp file (The preprocessor will just copies and pastes the .cpp file into a .hpp)
Q1. Including a .cpp file in a .hpp file is bad? why?
Due to the problem above, I am facing many "multiple declaration" errors when I load my program in eclipse, even though i added the header guards in all the .hpp files.
Q2. Should i be including the header guards in the .cpp files as well?
I tried the later too but to no avail. Any suggestions on this?
Q3. If 2 or more of my .cpp files need the same header files to be
used what is the best way to include all those header files? Should i
create a new header file say h1.hpp, include all the header files I
need in those 2 or more .cpp files and later include in this header
file in those .cpp files(s)?
Is it an efficient approach ?
Including a .cpp file in a .hpp file is bad? why?
In a typical code setup, yes. It serves no useful purpose and can lead to "duplicate definition" errors.
More importantly, it mixes the separation between the implementation and interface parts. When a file containing implementation is meant to be included, it's often changed to .inl (from "inline") extension.
Should i be including the header guards in the .cpp files as well?
No. Header guards prevent two (or more) other headers in one translation unit from including the same header twice. Since there's only one .cpp file per translation unit, this problem doesn't occur there.
To illustrate, an example inclusion could look like this:
common.hpp
/ \
/ \
A.hpp B.hpp
\ /
\ /
file.cpp
In this case, header guard in common.hpp prevents it from appearing twice in the TU introduced for file.cpp.
If 2 or more of my .cpp files need the same header files to be used what is the best way to include all those header files?
You shouldn't be scared by a long include chain, in general. It's less scary than it looks. That being said, "aggregate" headers can be used if the headers actually form a tree structure (to make including subsets easier, like collections.hpp and collections/vector.hpp + collections/list.hpp) or to include every header from the library.
I am having trouble understanding an answer I saw in another post. It said that it is good practice to define a struct in a separate .h file so it can be used in other files. I think that is great and it solves my current dilemma, however I have a question about compilation and makefiles. I am only familiar with having header files that are associated with .cpp files at the moment.
Can someone explain how that implementation would look when I have a .h and no .cpp? Do I need an implementation file as well? Also, how do I link the header in a makefile? Currently I only know how to compile a .cpp & header into a .o file and link them.
Thanks, and sorry for taking us back to c++ kindergarten. This is a new revelation and seems like a good one.
You don't need a matching source file (.c or .cpp) for every header .h file.
Having header files without corresponding source files is just fine.
When you #include some header file, you can think of it as a kind of "copy and paste" operation: the preprocessor copies the content of the header file, and pastes it in the point of inclusion.
(Well, there are some details to consider here, for example the presence of a #pragma once directive or some #ifdef inclusion guard can prevent multiple inclusions of the same header file in a given project.)
The C and C++ compilers will then process the whole "compilation unit", i.e. the current source file with all the included headers.
The key concept is that you define the struct/class in a .h header, so that you can use it in multiple .cpp files. Whenever you need struct foo defined in foo.h, you #include "foo.h". You don't need to directly compile the header file, it will be pulled in by whichever source file uses it. Therefore you don't need a make target for .h in normal circumstances.
If the definition in the header is never used, it won't be pulled in and that's it.
I looked up header file examples, but could only find simple ones with nothing to include.
So my question is where do I #include stuff like string and vector? In the .h or the .cpp file? Or maybe in both?
Anywhere you need.
If you need something declared in a header file, include them in the .h file.
Otherwise just in the .cpp file.
Note that including a .h file is just a textual replacement and the contents of the included .h file will be entirely inserted at the beginning of the file where they've been included. at the precise point of the #include line.
It is good practice to include a project-belonging headers before the standard library ones and never include a header if you don't need it.
Last thing you should keep in mind is that when working with large projects including many headers in a .h file shared by many translation units can increase compilation times if the header gets modified. It's usually preferred to just include what you strictly require in the appropriate files (either .cpp or .h). Precompiled headers might also help but it's off-topic to your question.
Finally: don't rely on "this header has been included somewhere else and I'm already including it through a second header" because it could render dependencies-tracking hard and favor circular dependencies when the project grows.
where do I #include stuff like string and vector? In the .h or the .cpp file?
There are multiple issues to consider in this, especially when projects get bigger (i.e. the bigger your project is, the more this affects you).
Personally, I follow these rules:
if code needs a header to compile, then you need to include it (if header declares things with std::string in the API, you will have to include string and the same goes for the C++ file)
do not include headers that are not needed (i.e. not "both" - if you include a header in your .h file, then include your .h file, you should be fine).
organize headers prioritizing for your project's files. this means if you have in a C++ file local project headers, and std and boost headers, you should (probably) include local project headers first, then boost, then std.
This is because the std headers will be the most tested/stable ones, and the most used API (this is a blind supposition on my part). If you were to include std headers first, and then project headers (for example), since the replacement is textual, you could get away with not adding the include in the project header. This would basically mask an error, because you would end up having to include the std headers before the local project header in all other cpp files from now on.
We have been asked a question in a practice paper 'What is the role of the header file in compilation? What are header guards used for in this context?'
A header file will have any declarations for classes which may be included in .cpp implementations. I understand that by including a header file in an implementation or other header file, it is possible for that code to know all the possible members of the class without knowing its implementation.
Having done a little reading through StackOverflow, some have suggested that header files can possibly slow down compilation (Coding C++ (mostly) in header files vs .cpp files) and that while a change to a header file will require a full rebuild of all implementations, while a change to an implementation does not require a full rebuild of the header file and all its implementations.
Would these be accurate? Is there any reason that a header file is necessary of beneficial in compilation and what role does it play?
Many thanks!
yes, although I would avoid using the term implementations for code files - people may think you are talking about the implementation of the class(es) in the headers, which could lead to confusion.
Also, changing a header file will not result in you needing to rebuild all the code files - only those which include (directly or otherwise) said header file.
Oh, and header guards are used to avoid the same file being included twice in a given compilation unit (resulting in redefinitions of things).
I am working on a small game using C++, and I used Eclipse CDT's class generator. It created a .h file with the class definitions and a .cpp file that included body-less methods for said class.
So if I followed the template, I'd have a .cpp file filled with the methods declarations, and a .cpp file with method bodies. However, I can't include a .cpp file within another.
So what is the convention in C++ with classes and include files? What I did was fill in the method bodies right under the class declaration in the .h file, and deleted the .cpp file.
You don't have to include the .cpp file. Including the .h file is all it takes. .h means header, ie, all it should have is function / object definitions. The actual implementations go in the .cpp file of the same name. The linker will deal with straightening it out for you.
The header file contains declarations (also known as prototype). Inclusion of the header lets the program know "I declare something that looks like this exists".
The user of headers saves us the effort of declaring methods all over the place in our code files - we just do it once, then import the file.
The .c/.cpp/.cc file includes the definition - which tells the program what the function does.
You do not have to "include" .c files because that's what the compiler does - it compiles all your .c files into machine code.
One more thing you can do is while creating a header file is to use the preprocessor directive
ifdef and endif. This will prevent your header file being included multiple times.
This is a standard practice which I use whenever I create a new header file.
I'm not quite sure I understand. The header files defines what the class is and can do, and you include that into any source files that need to use the class.
The source file implements how the class does its action.
However, you can include a .cpp into another (you can include anything into anything), but you don't need to.