I've been working on an assignment and now I'm stuck with buggy destructors. I have to create a generic binary tree with all the usual member functions and some special operators. There's also a restriction: everything must work iteratively so no nasty recursive hacks this time.
There is obviously something very wrong with the destructor of BinTreeNode class because if I delete the node like this:
BinTreeNode<int> * node = new BinTreeNode<int>();
delete node;
I can still access its data:
node->getData(); //should fail miserably
so deletion has no effect but I have no usable idea how I should correct the destructor.
It seems to me that the algorithm should be about right so I suspect there's something wrong with how I use pointers but at this point I'm so confused that I don't even understand my own code.
Code I have this far:
BinTree.h
#ifndef BINTREE_H_
#define BINTREE_H_
#ifndef NULL
#define NULL 0
#endif
#include "BinTreeNode.h"
template <class T>
class BinTree
{
private:
BinTreeNode<T> * root;
public:
//constructors and destructor
BinTree():
root(NULL){}
BinTree(T data):
root(new BinTreeNode<T>(data)){}
~BinTree();
//search
BinTreeNode<T> * search(T data);
//insert
bool insert(T data);
//remove
bool remove(T data);
};
template <class T>
BinTree<T>::~BinTree()
{
delete root;
}
template <class T>
BinTreeNode<T> * BinTree<T>::search(T data)
{
BinTreeNode<T> * node = new BinTreeNode<T>(data);
BinTreeNode<T> * current = root;
while (current != NULL)
{
if (*current == *node)
{
delete node;
return root;
}
else if (*node < *current)
{
current = current->getLeft();
}
else
{
current = current->getRight();
}
}
delete node;
return NULL;
}
template <class T>
bool BinTree<T>::insert(T data)
{
BinTreeNode<T> * node = new BinTreeNode<T>(data);
BinTreeNode<T> * current = root;
while (current != NULL)
{
if (*current == *node)
{
delete node;
return false;
}
else if (*node < *current)
{
if (current->getLeft() == NULL)
{
current->setLeft(node);
return true;
}
else
{
current = current->getLeft();
}
}
else
{
if (current->getRight() == NULL)
{
current->setRight(node);
return true;
}
else
{
current = current->getRight();
}
}
}
return false;
}
#endif
BinTreeNode.h
#ifndef BINTREENODE_H_
#define BINTREENODE_H_
#ifndef NULL
#define NULL 0
#endif
template <class T>
class BinTreeNode
{
private:
T data;
BinTreeNode<T> *left, *right, *parent;
public:
//constructors and destructor
BinTreeNode():
data(NULL), left(NULL), right(NULL), parent(NULL){}
BinTreeNode(T data):
data(data), left(NULL), right(NULL), parent(NULL){}
~BinTreeNode();
//set and get data member
T getData() const;
void setData(T data);
//set and get left and right branches
BinTreeNode<T> * getLeft() const;
BinTreeNode<T> * getRight() const;
void setLeft(BinTreeNode<T> * node);
void setRight(BinTreeNode<T> * node);
//set and get parent
BinTreeNode<T> * getParent() const;
void setParent(BinTreeNode<T> * node);
//comparison operators
bool operator<(const BinTreeNode<T>& node) const;
bool operator>(const BinTreeNode<T>& node) const;
bool operator==(const BinTreeNode<T>& node) const;
};
template <class T>
BinTreeNode<T>::~BinTreeNode()
{
BinTreeNode<T> * current = this;
BinTreeNode<T> * parent = NULL;
while (current != NULL)
{
parent = current->getParent();
if (current->getLeft() == NULL)
current = current->getLeft();
else if (current->getRight() == NULL)
current = current->getRight();
else
{
if (parent->getRight() == current)
parent->setRight(NULL);
else
parent->setLeft(NULL);
current = NULL; // this line (among others) is very suspicious
}
current = parent;
}
}
template <class T>
T BinTreeNode<T>::getData() const
{
return data;
}
template <class T>
void BinTreeNode<T>::setData(T data)
{
this->data = data;
}
template <class T>
BinTreeNode<T> * BinTreeNode<T>::getLeft() const
{
return left;
}
template <class T>
BinTreeNode<T> * BinTreeNode<T>::getRight() const
{
return right;
}
template <class T>
void BinTreeNode<T>::setLeft(BinTreeNode<T> * node)
{
node->setParent(this);
left = node;
}
template <class T>
void BinTreeNode<T>::setRight(BinTreeNode<T> * node)
{
node->setParent(this);
right = node;
}
template <class T>
BinTreeNode<T> * BinTreeNode<T>::getParent() const
{
return parent;
}
template <class T>
void BinTreeNode<T>::setParent(BinTreeNode<T> * node)
{
parent = node;
}
template <class T>
bool BinTreeNode<T>::operator<(const BinTreeNode<T>& node) const
{
return this->data < node.data;
}
template <class T>
bool BinTreeNode<T>::operator>(const BinTreeNode<T>& node) const
{
return this->data > node.data;
}
template <class T>
bool BinTreeNode<T>::operator==(const BinTreeNode<T>& node) const
{
return this->data == node.data;
}
#endif /* BINTREENODE_H_ */
Your BinTreeNode destructor should simply be:
template <class T>
BinTreeNode<T>::~BinTreeNode() {
delete left;
delete right;
}
That will call left and right's destructors recursively, freeing the memory allocated for those nodes and their child nodes. This will as a consequence free the entire tree.
Assigning NULL to a pointer does not free the memory pointed by it.
On the other hand, what you mention, that after deletion, this line:
node->getData();
Still returns data, is perfectly normal. Deletion frees the memory, but the data stored in it might still be available for a while, until something new is written in that memory address. Accessing an already free'd memory address implies undefined behaviour.
BTW, you should use "0"(without quotes) in C++ instead of NULL. Therefore, there it's not necessary to use the #ifndef NULL(...).
EDIT: I hadn't seen the "no recursion" comment. Here's a non-recursive algorithm:
#include <deque>
/* ... */
template <class T>
BinTreeNode<T>::~BinTreeNode() {
std::deque deq;
// we're going to delete our children
deq.push_back(this);
while(deq.size()) {
BinTreeNode<T> *ptr = deq.front();
deq.pop_front();
if(ptr) {
deq.push_back(ptr->left);
deq.push_back(ptr->right);
// we don't want the child nodes
// to double delete the children
ptr->left = 0;
ptr->right = 0;
// avoid deleteing ourselves
if(ptr != this)
delete ptr;
}
}
}
I haven't tested it, but it should work.
Related
I created a List with a template Node class to hold different data types such as Node<int> but also more complex types such as Node<BaseEvent*>.
I also have an event container class to hold different event objects so it has a member argument
List<BaseEvent*> events;
where BaseEvent is an abstract class with derived classes that are not abstract.
In the event container I have a method called "add" (see below) that adds a new event to that events.
BaseEvent* eventClone = event.clone();
The clone returns a pointer to a new derived object such as:
new OpenEvent(*this);
Once it calls the list's insert method, it instantiates a new Node (see below), and in the Node constructor it assigns the value like so:
value(new T(new_value))
So basically it allocates a pointer memory (T=BaseEvent*).
I think I might be losing the eventClone pointer and have a memory leak.
The problem is that when I debugged it I saw that both: T* value; (aka BaseEvent** value) and BaseEvent* eventClone have the same address in memory.
I'm not sure if when I do delete value in the destructor of Node it will just free the pointer allocation to BaseEvent* or also the data that it holds.
Any insights are welcome!
Relevant code snippets
Node<T>
template <class T>
class Node
{
public:
Node(const T& new_value, Node* new_next = NULL, Node* new_prev = NULL);
~Node();
const T& getValue() const;
Node<T>* getNext() const;
Node<T>* getPrev() const;
void setNext(Node* node);
void setPrev(Node* node);
private:
T* value;
Node* next;
Node* prev;
};
template <class T>
Node<T>::Node(const T& new_value, Node* new_next, Node* new_prev) :
value(new T(new_value))
{
next = new_next;
prev = new_prev;
}
template <class T>
Node<T>::~Node()
{
delete value;
}
...
Linked list that uses Node<T>
template <class T>
class List
{
public:
List();
~List();
int getSize() const;
Node<T>* getFirst() const;
Node<T>* getNext(Node<T>& node) const;
Node<T>* getPrev(Node<T>& node) const;
void insertStart(const T& data);
void insertLast(const T& data);
void insertAfter(Node<T>& target, const T& data);
void insertBefore(Node<T>& target, const T& data);
void removeNode(Node<T>& node);
bool contains(const T data);
private:
Node<T>* head;
int size;
};
template <class T>
List<T>::List() : head(NULL), size(0)
{
}
template <class T>
List<T>::~List()
{
Node<T>* temp;
while (head)
{
temp = head;
head = head->getNext();
delete temp;
size--;
}
}
...
template <class T>
void List<T>::insertStart(const T& data) {
if (size == 0)
{
head = new Node<T>(data);
}
else
{
Node<T>* temp = new Node<T>(data, head);
head->setPrev(temp);
head = temp;
}
size++;
}
...
The event container class:
class EventContainer
{
public:
EventContainer() :
events(List<BaseEvent*>()) {}
~EventContainer() {}
virtual void add(const BaseEvent&);
class EventIterator
{
public:
EventIterator() :
current(NULL) {}
EventIterator(Node<BaseEvent*>& node) :
current(&node) {}
EventIterator(Node<BaseEvent*>* node) :
current(node) {}
~EventIterator() {}
EventIterator& operator=(const EventIterator& nodeIterator) {
current = nodeIterator.current;
return *this;
}
EventIterator& operator++() {
current = current->getNext();
return *this;
}
BaseEvent& operator*() const {
return *(current->getValue());
}
friend bool operator==(const EventIterator& iterator1, const EventIterator& iterator2) {
return iterator1.current == iterator2.current;
}
bool operator!=(const EventIterator& iterator) const {
return !(*this == iterator);
}
private:
Node<BaseEvent*>* current;
};
virtual EventIterator begin() const;
virtual EventIterator end() const;
private:
List<BaseEvent*> events;
};
The implementation of add method:
void EventContainer::add(const BaseEvent& event) {
BaseEvent* eventClone = event.clone();
if (events.getSize() == 0)
{
events.insertStart(eventClone);
return;
}
Node<BaseEvent*>* current = events.getFirst();
while (current != NULL)
{
if (*eventClone < *(current->getValue()))
{
events.insertBefore(*current, eventClone);
return;
}
current = current->getNext();
}
events.insertLast(eventClone);
}
EventContainer::EventIterator EventContainer::begin() const {
return events.getFirst();
}
EventContainer::EventIterator EventContainer::end() const {
return NULL;
}
I have a problem with creating base class for DoubleLinkedList.
Right now it's giving me this error
/tmp/cc3lORia.o:(.rodata._ZTV24AbstractDoubleLinkedListIiE[_ZTV24AbstractDoubleLinkedListIiE]+0x10):
undefined reference to
`AbstractDoubleLinkedList::createNewNode(int)' collect2: error:
ld returned 1 exit status
I've tried this and that as you can see by commented lines in code, but none of it works.
So how to define abstract template class with abstract method (factory method by the way) and then redefine it in children classes?
/*
* AbstractDoubleLinkedList.hpp
*
* Created on: Mar 2, 2015
* Author: michael
*/
#ifndef ABSTRACTDOUBLELINKEDLIST_H_
#define ABSTRACTDOUBLELINKEDLIST_H_
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
template <class T> class ListNode {
private:
void init();
public:
ListNode();
ListNode(T value);
ListNode *previous;
ListNode *next;
T value;
};
template <class T> void ListNode<T>::init() {
previous = nullptr;
next = nullptr;
}
template <class T> ListNode<T>::ListNode() {
init();
}
template <class T> ListNode<T>::ListNode(T value) {
init();
this->value = value;
}
template <class T> class AbstractDoubleLinkedList {
private:
void pullOutNode(ListNode<T> *node);
protected:
virtual ListNode<T>* createNewNode(T element);
public:
AbstractDoubleLinkedList();
void push_back(T element);
T front();
T back();
void insertBefore(ListNode<T> *node, ListNode<T> *beforeNode);
void insertAfter(ListNode<T> *node, ListNode<T> *afterNode);
void moveNodeAfter(ListNode<T> *node, ListNode<T> *afterNode);
vector<T> toVector();
ListNode<T> *frontNode;
ListNode<T> *backNode;
};
template <class T> void AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::push_back(T element) {
ListNode<T>* node = createNewNode(element);
node->previous = backNode;
if (backNode != nullptr) {
backNode->next = node;
node->previous = backNode;
}
else {
frontNode = node;
}
backNode = node;
}
template <class T> void AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::pullOutNode(ListNode<T> *node) {
if (node != frontNode) {
node->previous->next = node->next;
}
else {
frontNode = node->next;
}
if (node != backNode) {
node->next->previous = node->previous;
}
else {
backNode = node->previous;
}
}
template <class T> T AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::front() {
return frontNode->value;
}
template <class T> T AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::back() {
return backNode->value;
}
template <class T> void AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::insertAfter(ListNode<T> *node, ListNode<T> *afterNode) {
node->previous = afterNode;
node->next = afterNode->next;
afterNode->next = node;
if (afterNode == backNode) {
backNode = node;
}
}
template <class T> void AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::insertBefore(ListNode<T> *node, ListNode<T> *beforeNode) {
node->next = beforeNode;
beforeNode->previous->next = node;
beforeNode->previous = node;
if (beforeNode == frontNode) {
frontNode = node;
}
}
template <class T> void AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::moveNodeAfter(ListNode<T> *node, ListNode<T> *afterNode) {
pullOutNode(node);
node->previous = afterNode;
node->next = afterNode->next;
if (node->next == nullptr) {
backNode = node;
}
afterNode->next = node;
}
template <class T> vector<T> AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::toVector() {
ListNode<T>* node = frontNode;
vector<int> listAsVector;
bool shouldHaveAnother = (frontNode != nullptr);
while(shouldHaveAnother) {
listAsVector.push_back(node->value);
if (node->next != nullptr)
node = node->next;
else {
shouldHaveAnother = false;
}
}
return listAsVector;
}
template <class T> AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T>::AbstractDoubleLinkedList() {
frontNode = nullptr;
backNode = nullptr;
}
#endif /* ABSTRACTDOUBLELINKEDLIST_HPP_ */
/*
* DoubleLinkedList.hpp
*
* Created on: Feb 26, 2015
* Author: michael
*/
#ifndef DOUBLELINKEDLIST_HPP_
#define DOUBLELINKEDLIST_HPP_
#include "AbstractDoubleLinkedList.hpp"
template <class T> class DoubleLinkedList : public AbstractDoubleLinkedList<T> {
protected:
ListNode<T>* createNewNode(T element) {
return new ListNode<T>(element);
}
public:
~DoubleLinkedList() {
ListNode<T>* node = this->backNode;
bool shouldHaveAnother = (node != nullptr);
while(shouldHaveAnother) {
ListNode<T>* ptr = node->previous;
delete node;
if (ptr != nullptr)
node = ptr;
else {
shouldHaveAnother = false;
}
}
};
};
//template <class T> ListNode<T> DoubleLinkedList<T>::createNewNode(T element) {
// return new ListNode<T>(element);
//}
//template <class T> DoubleLinkedList<T>::~DoubleLinkedList() {
//
// ListNode<T>* node = this->backNode;
// bool shouldHaveAnother = (node != nullptr);
// while(shouldHaveAnother) {
// ListNode<T>* ptr = node->previous;
// delete node;
// if (ptr != nullptr)
// node = ptr;
// else {
// shouldHaveAnother = false;
// }
// }
//}
#endif /* DOUBLELINKEDLIST_HPP_ */
EDIT1:
So, there is a question "Why do I need my own container class and why not use list or vector?"
I need a data structure with constant time random access and constant time deletion and insertion. BUT I've already tried std::unordered_set and It's not good enough (while technically it meets the requirements) because of allocations and deallocations of memory (when deleting and inserting)
So I figured another way. I want to use a linked list with one "guard" element and the end. When I need to "delete" element from it I would move it after guard. And to check if list is "empty" I would check if the first element is the guard element. But I need a constant-time random access. This can be achieved by map of pointers to every element.
But to achieve maximum performance I need to also minimize cache misses. And I thinks that std::list would be scattered across the memory, because it is the normal behaviour for it. So I figured that the only way to do so - is to allocate vector> and then use this preallocated nodes to new elements.
So am I wrong somewhere? Can I achieve maximum performance more easier?
I'm been having trouble with either my constructor or my insert function, I'm not sure which is the issue, but the real issue is that I get the error code mentioning I'm having an error with things getting de-referenced. All I'm trying to do is insert a node containing an integer value in the correct position.
This is the declaration:
template <class T>
class LinkedList
{
template <class T>
struct Node
{
T mData;
Node<T> *mNext;
/* Pre: None
* Post: This object is initialized using default values
* Purpose: To initialize date object
*************************************************************************/
Node()
{
mData = T();
mNext = NULL;
}
/* Pre: None
* Post: This object is initialized using specified data
* Purpose: To intialize date object
*************************************************************************/
Node(T data, Node<T>* next)
{
mData = data;
mNext = next;
}
};
private:
Node<T> *mHead;
int mCount;
public:
LinkedList();
~LinkedList();
int getCount();
T getData(int index);
void setData(int index, T data);
void clear();
void display();
bool insert(T data);
bool isEmpty();
bool isExist(T searchKey);
bool remove(T searchKey);
T removeAt(int index);
T operator[](int index);
void operator=(LinkedList<T> *list);
};
And this is the insert:
template <class T>
bool LinkedList<T>::insert(T data)
{
Node<T>* current = mHead;
if (!current)
{
if (mCount == 0)
{
current->mData = data;
}
else
{
while (current->mNext != NULL)
{
if (current->mData == data)
return false;
else if (current->mNext->mData < data)
{
Node<T>* newNode = new Node<T>();
newNode->mData = data;
newNode->mNext = current->mNext;
current->mNext = newNode;
}
current = current->mNext;
}
}
}
else
{
Node<T>* node = new Node<T>(data, NULL);
current->mNext = node;
}
mCount++;
return true;
}
Every time my program breaks, it's at this line
current->mData = data;
You shouldn't declare Node class as template, in fact you should get a compile error message like error: declaration of 'T' shadows template parameter.
Remove template<class T> from Node and change Node<T> to Node throughout the code.
This is the first time I've ever played with an iterator so there's probably significant errors. I'm attempting to make an inorder iterative iterator class to work in conjunction with my threaded binary search tree. So the iterator is working over nodes. I only need the iterator to go through my tree in order so I can print all the values and the frequencies of each node. However my dereference doesn't seem to be working probably. This is the method that's giving me trouble:
//-------------------------- inOrderTraverse ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
void ThreadedBST<T>::inOrderTraverse() {
InorderIterator<T>* iter = new InorderIterator<T>(root);
++iter;
while ((*iter) != NULL)
{
cout << (*iter)->getItem() << " " << (*iter)->getFrequency() << endl;
}
}
Particularly the while loop is throwing compiler errors. Here is the exact error:
error C2678: binary '!=' : no operator found which takes a left-hand operand of type 'InorderIterator'
I figured the dereference would bring the node out so I'd actually be comparing the node != NULL but that's not what the error message leads me to believe. Here's the full Iterator class:
#ifndef INORDERITER_H
#define INORDERITER_H
#include <iostream>
#include "ThreadedBST.h"
using namespace std;
//---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// InorderIterator<T> class:
// --
//
// Assumptions:
// -- <T> implements it's own comparable functionality
//---------------------------------------------------------------------------
template <typename T>
class InorderIterator {
public:
InorderIterator(node<T> *); //constructor
InorderIterator<T>& operator++();
node<T>& operator*();
const node<T>& operator*() const;
private:
node<T>* begin;
node<T>* curr;
node<T>* prev;
node<T>* temp;
};
template <typename T>
InorderIterator<T>::InorderIterator(node<T>* root) {
begin = root;
temp = NULL;
while (begin->leftChild != NULL) {
begin = begin->leftChild;
}
}
template <typename T>
InorderIterator<T>& InorderIterator<T>::operator++() {
if (temp == NULL)
temp = begin;
else if (rightChildThread) {
prev = temp;
temp = temp->rightChild;
}
else {
prev = temp;
temp = temp->rightChild;
while (!temp->rightChildThread && (temp->leftChild->getItem() != prev->getItem())) {
temp = temp->leftChild;
}
}
curr = temp;
return *this;
}
template <typename T>
node<T>& InorderIterator<T>::operator*() {
return *curr;
}
template <typename T>
const node<T>& InorderIterator<T>::operator*() const {
return *curr;
}
#endif
Here's the node class if it's relevant for any reason:
#ifndef NODE_H
#define NODE_H
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
//---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// node<T> class:
// --
//
// Assumptions:
// -- <T> implements it's own comparable functionality
//---------------------------------------------------------------------------
template <typename T>
class node {
public:
node<T>* leftChild;
node<T>* rightChild;
bool leftChildThread;
bool rightChildThread;
node(T value); //constructor
node(T value, node<T>*, node<T>*, bool, bool); //secondary constructor
node(const node<T>&); //copy constructor
void decrementFrequency(); //decrements by 1 the frequency
void incrementFrequency(); //increments by 1 the frequency
int getFrequency(); //returns the frequency
T getItem(); //returns the item
private:
T item;
int frequency;
};
//-------------------------- Constructor ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
node<T>::node(T value) {
item = value;
frequency = 1;
}
//-------------------------- Secondary Constructor ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
node<T>::node(T value, node<T>* left, node<T>* right, bool leftThread, bool rightThread) {
item = value;
frequency = 1;
leftChild = left;
rightChild = right;
leftChildThread = leftThread;
rightChildThread = rightThread;
}
//-------------------------- Copy ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
node<T>::node(const node<T>& copyThis) {
item = copyThis.value;
frequency = copyThis.frequency;
}
//-------------------------- decrementFrequency ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
void node<T>::decrementFrequency() {
frequency--;
}
//-------------------------- incrementFrequency ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
void node<T>::incrementFrequency() {
frequency++;
}
//-------------------------- getFrequency ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
int node<T>::getFrequency() {
return frequency;
}
//-------------------------- getItem ------------------------------------
template <typename T>
T node<T>::getItem() {
return item;
}
#endif
class const_iterator {
public:
Node *current;
const_iterator (Node *n) : current{n}
{
/* the body can remain blank, the initialization is carried
* the the constructor init list above
*/
}
/* copy assignment */
const_iterator operator= (const const_iterator& rhs) {
this->current = rhs.current;
return *this;
}
bool operator == (const const_iterator& rhs) const {
return this->current == rhs.current;
}
bool operator != (const const_iterator& rhs) const {
return this->current != rhs.current;
}
/* Update the current pointer to advance to the node
* with the next larger value
*/
const_iterator& operator++ () {
/*first step is to go left as far as possible(taken care of by begin())
once you go as left as possible, go right one step at a time*/
if(current->right != nullptr){
current = current->right;
//every step, go left again as far as possible
while(current->left != nullptr){
current = current->left;
}
}else{
bool upFromLeft = false;
bool upFromRight = false;
while(upFromLeft == false && upFromRight == false){
//if you have gone all the way up from the right
if(current->parent == nullptr){
upFromRight = true;
current = current->parent;
return *this;
}
//if you have gone all the way back up left
if(current->parent->left == current){
upFromLeft = true;
current = current->parent;
return *this;
}
current = current->parent;
}
}
return *this;
}
Z& operator *() const {
return current->data;
}
};
ADD these functions to your tree in order to use the begin() and end() with your iterator
const const_iterator begin() const {
if(rootPtr == nullptr){
return nullptr;
}
Node* temp = rootPtr;
while(temp->left != nullptr){
temp = temp->left;
}
return const_iterator(temp);
}
/* For the "end" marker
* we will use an iterator initialized to nil */
const const_iterator end() const {
return const_iterator(nullptr);
}
Here's an example of an in-order iterator I wrote in C++...
This iterator assumes that each node in your BST has a pointer to the parent node which is something I don't see in your node class. However, I am not sure its even possible to accomplish an inorder traversal without having a parent pointer.
In short, this example will work if you add a parent pointer to your nodes and update your parent pointers every time you do a node insertion or removal
So I am trying to create my own implementation file which contains instructions for a Queue. I decided to use a linked list to implement the Queue class, meaning that I need to use my own Node struct. Unfortunately, I am stuck and don't know how to properly include this within the file.
This is what I have so far:
#include <string>
#ifndef NODE
template <class DataType>
struct Node
{
DataType data;
Node *next;
};
#endif
template <class DataType>
class Queue
{
public:
Queue();
bool isEmpty() const;
void push(const DataType& parameter);
bool peek(DataType& parameter) const;
bool pop(DataType& parameter);
void makeEmpty();
private:
Node<DataType>* front;
Node<DataType>* end;
};
template <class DataType>
Queue<DataType>::Queue()
: front(0), end(0)
{
}
template <class DataType>
bool Queue<DataType>::isEmpty() const {return 0 == front;}
template <class DataType>
void Queue<DataType>::push(const DataType& parameter)
{
Node<DataType>* node = new Node<DataType>;
node->data = parameter;
node->next = 0;
if (end) end->next = node;
else front = node;
end = node;
}
template <class DataType>
bool Queue<DataType>::peek(DataType& parameter) const
{
if (0 == front) return false; // failed
parameter = front->data;
return true; // success
}
template <class DataType>
bool Queue<DataType>::pop(DataType& parameter)
{
if (0 == front) return false; // failed
parameter = front->data;
Node<DataType>* p = front->next;
delete front;
front = p;
if (front == 0) end = 0;
return true; // success
}
template <class DataType>
void Queue<DataType>::makeEmpty()
{
end = 0;
Node<DataType>* p;
while (front)
{
p = front->next;
delete front;
front = p;
}
}
I'm not sure if I am enclosing the struct by the #ifndef correctly (i'm not even sure if this is the route I should be taking :/), should I be doing something similar to this or should I be doing something else with the code for the struct?
You can just drop the #ifdef/#endif entirely
This is a class template and it may occur many times in several tranlation units, as long as all the occurrences are identical (One Definition Rule)
Alternative
Since Node<> is purely a private concern, I'd make it a nested struct.
Here's a little demo making this more 'modern C++' style.
Edit Thanks to #R.MartinhoFernandes for showing a few more improvements and for reviewing this.
#include <memory>
template <typename T>
struct Queue {
Queue() : front(), end(/*nullptr*/) {}
// Copy-And-Swap idiom
// see http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/More_C%2B%2B_Idioms/Copy-and-swap
// or http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3279543/what-is-the-copy-and-swap-idiom
void swap(Queue& q) noexcept {
using std::swap;
swap(q.front, front);
swap(q.end, end);
}
Queue(Queue const& q) : front(), end() {
for(auto it=q.front.get(); it; it=it->next.get())
push(it->data);
}
Queue& operator=(Queue q) {
std::swap(*this, q);
return *this;
}
// end Copy-and-swap
// prevent stack overflows in ~Node if the list grows large (say >1k elements)
~Queue() { clear(); }
bool isEmpty() const {
return !front;
}
void push(T const& data) {
Ptr node(new Node(data));
if (end)
end->next = std::move(node);
else
front = std::move(node);
end = node.get();
}
bool peek(T& data) const {
if(front) data = front->data;
return front.get();
}
bool pop(T& data) {
if(!front) return false;
data = front->data;
front = std::move(front->next);
if(!front) end = nullptr;
return true;
}
void clear() {
end = nullptr;
while(front) front = std::move(front->next);
}
private:
struct Node;
typedef std::unique_ptr<struct Node> Ptr;
struct Node {
Node(T data) : data(std::move(data)), next() {}
T data;
Ptr next;
};
Ptr front;
Node* end;
};
#include <iostream>
int main(int argc, const char *argv[]) {
Queue<int> test;
test.push(1);
test.push(2);
test.push(3);
test.push(5);
test.clear();
test.push(32028);
test.push(10842);
test.push(1839);
test.push(23493);
test.push(9857);
int x;
test.peek(x);
while(test.pop(x)) {
std::cout << x << '\n';
}
}
Note: Perhaps the code in push has been golfed a bit too far, but hey, it shows you how modern C++ requires much less handholding (even without std::make_unique).
Note how I think Clang correctly handles the following version (i.e. with implicit std::move):
void push(const DataType& parameter) {
end = ((end? end->next : front) = Ptr(new Node(parameter))).get();
}
I'm not quite sure why gcc rejects it.