So, i've problem with std::map, lambda and stl algorithm(remove_if). Actually, same code with std::list or std::vector works well.
My test example :
#include <map>
#include <iostream>
#include <algorithm>
struct Foo
{
Foo() : _id(0) {}
Foo(int id) : _id(id)
{
}
int _id;
};
typedef std::map<int, Foo> FooMap;
int main()
{
FooMap m;
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
m[i + 100] = Foo(i);
int removeId = 6;
// <<< Error here >>>
std::remove_if(m.begin(), m.end(), [=](const FooMap::value_type & item) { return item.second._id == removeId ;} );
for (auto & item : m )
std::cout << item.first << " = " << item.second._id << "\n";
return 0;
}
Error message :
In file included from /usr/include/c++/4.6/utility:71:0,
from /usr/include/c++/4.6/algorithm:61,
from main.cxx:1:
/usr/include/c++/4.6/bits/stl_pair.h: In member function ‘std::pair<_T1, _T2>& std::pair<_T1, _T2>::operator=(std::pair<_T1, _T2>&&) [with _T1 = const int, _T2 = Foo, std::pair<_T1, _T2> = std::pair<const int, Foo>]’:
/usr/include/c++/4.6/bits/stl_algo.h:1149:13: instantiated from ‘_FIter std::remove_if(_FIter, _FIter, _Predicate) [with _FIter = std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<const int, Foo> >, _Predicate = main()::<lambda(const value_type&)>]’
main.cxx:33:114: instantiated from here
/usr/include/c++/4.6/bits/stl_pair.h:156:2: error: assignment of read-only member ‘std::pair<const int, Foo>::first’
I don't understand what's wrong here. So, i gladly to read some advices/directions about it. My goal - use new lambda-style with std::map and algorithms, such as remove_if.
g++ 4.6, -std=c++0x.
The problem is that std::map<K,V>::value_type is std::pair<const K, V>, aka .first is const and not assignable. Lambdas have nothing to do with the problem here.
std::remove_if "removes" items by moving the elements of the container around, so that everything that does not fit the predicate is at the front, before the returned iterator. Everything after that iterator is unspecified. It does that with simple assignment, and since you can't assign to a const variable, you get that error.†
The name remove can be a bit misleading and in this case, you really want erase_if, but alas, that doesn't exist. You'll have to make do with iterating over all items and erasing them by hand with map.erase(iterator):
for(auto it = map.begin(), ite = map.end(); it != ite;)
{
if(it->second._id == remove_id)
it = map.erase(it);
else
++it;
}
This is safe because you can erase individual nodes in the tree without the other iterators getting invalidated. Note that I did not increment the iterator in the for loop header itself, since that would skip an element in the case where you erase a node.
† By now, you should have noticed that this would wreak havoc in the std::map's ordering, which is the reason why the key is const - so you can't influence the ordering in any way after an item has been inserted.
You could use find and erase for the map. It's not as convenient as remove_if, but it might be the best you've got.
int removeId = 6;
auto foundIter = m.find(removeId);
// if removeId is not found you will get an error when you try to erase m.end()
if(foundIter != m.end())
{
m.erase(foundIter);
}
Related
Consider the following uncomplicated code:
#include <thread>
#include <utility>
#include <vector>
#include <atomic>
#include <queue>
#include <iostream>
#include <functional>
using namespace std;
template<class It, class Fun>
void parallel_for(size_t num_threads, It first, It end, const Fun& fun) {
std::queue<std::thread> ts;
for (It it = first; it != end; ++it) {
if (std::distance(first, it) % num_threads == 0) {
fun(*it);
} else {
if (ts.size() == num_threads-1) {
ts.front().join();
ts.pop();
}
ts.push(std::thread(fun, std::ref(*it)));
}
}
while (not ts.empty()) {
ts.front().join();
ts.pop();
}
}
int main() {
std::atomic_int counter = 1;
auto lam = [&counter](auto& vl) {
vl = std::pair(counter++, -1);
};
// The following usage of std::ref works okay:
pair<int, int> x;
auto blam = bind(lam, ref(x));
blam();
// Nevertheless, the next line fails:
// lam(ref(x));
// As well as the next two ones:
// vector<pair<int, int>> v = {{4, 2}};
// parallel_for(thread::hardware_concurrency(), begin(v), end(v), lam);
return 0;
}
GCC's error on the last two lines, in particular, is
In file included from ./src/csc_cpp/passing_lambdas.cpp:1:
/usr/include/c++/10/thread: In instantiation of ‘std::thread::thread(_Callable&&, _Args&& ...) [with _Callable = const main()::<lambda(auto:1&)>&; _Args = {std::reference_wrapper<std::pair<int, int> >}; <template-parameter-1-3> = void]’:
./src/csc_cpp/passing_lambdas.cpp:22:26: required from ‘void parallel_for(size_t, It, It, const Fun&) [with It = __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<std::pair<int, int>*, std::vector<std::pair<int, int> > >; Fun = main()::<lambda(auto:1&)>; size_t = long unsigned int]’
./src/csc_cpp/passing_lambdas.cpp:47:71: required from here
/usr/include/c++/10/thread:136:44: error: static assertion failed: std::thread arguments must be invocable after conversion to rvalues
136 | typename decay<_Args>::type...>::value,
| ^~~~~
I am sure this is a trivial matter, but I am anyway struggling to understand this. I think I have been following the available examples on std::thread::thread()'s intended use quite closely, but this does not compile. What am I doing wrong?
First, let me clarify, because I'm not sure if it's obvious: the trick behind std::ref is that it returns an object of type std::reference_wrapper<T>, so you can use the result as object, but the object is implicitly convertible to T&, so it can be substituted where T& is needed.
lam(ref(x)); fails because you use auto in lam. Compiler doesn't know that you want vl to be std::pair<int, int>&, it deduces from what it gets. std::ref returns a temporary of std::reference_wrapper<std::pair<int, int>>, which cannot be bound to non-const reference. Use explicit type in lambda and it compiles:
auto lam = [&counter](std::pair<int, int>& vl) {
vl = std::pair(counter++, -1);
};
lam(std::ref(x));
Alternatively, you can explicitly convert to std::pair<int, int>& using get() or static_cast
auto lam = [&counter](auto& vl) {
vl = std::pair(counter++, -1);
};
lam(std::ref(x).get());
lam(static_cast<std::pair<int, int>&>(std::ref(x)));
The second part with parallel_for has exactly the same issue, you pass rvalue of std::reference_wrapper to lam.
About
lam(ref(x));
x is an lvalue while the ref(x) is a temporary reference_wrapper. You can not grab a temporary with an lvalue reference in your lam through auto&.
for that line, you can simply use
lam(x);
I'm going to remove elements from a list of pairs. When I'm using a pair like
std::pair<const int, bool>
I get the following compilation error:
In file included from /usr/local/include/c++/6.1.0/utility:70:0,
from /usr/local/include/c++/6.1.0/algorithm:60,
from main.cpp:1:
/usr/local/include/c++/6.1.0/bits/stl_pair.h: In instantiation of
'std::pair<_T1, _T2>& std::pair<_T1, _T2>::operator=(std::pair<_T1,
_T2>&&) [with _T1 = const int; _T2 = bool]':
/usr/local/include/c++/6.1.0/bits/stl_algo.h:868:16: required from
'_ForwardIterator std::__remove_if(_ForwardIterator, _ForwardIterator,
_Predicate) [with _ForwardIterator = std::_List_iterator > _Predicate =
__gnu_cxx::__ops::_Iter_pred&)> >]'
/usr/local/include/c++/6.1.0/bits/stl_algo.h:936:30: required from
'_FIter std::remove_if(_FIter, _FIter, _Predicate) [with _FIter =
std::_List_iterator > _Predicate =
main()::&)>]'
main.cpp:17:32: required from here
/usr/local/include/c++/6.1.0/bits/stl_pair.h:319:8: error: assignment
of read-only member 'std::pair::first'
first = std::forward(__p.first);
This is the sample code:
int main()
{
int id = 2;
std::list< std::pair <const int, bool> > l;
l.push_back(std::make_pair(3,true));
l.push_back(std::make_pair(2,false));
l.push_back(std::make_pair(1,true));
l.erase(std::remove_if(l.begin(), l.end(),
[id](std::pair<const int, bool>& e) -> bool {
return e.first == id; }));
for (auto i: l) {
std::cout << i.first << " " << i.second << std::endl;
}
}
I know that (please correct me If I am wrong):
I will have exactly the same problem as long as there is constness in any element of the list, for example, a list <const int> will also return a compilation error.
If I remove the const in the first element of the pair the code will work.
The more elegant and efficient way to do it is by using the remove_if list method, like this:
l.remove_if([id](std::pair<const int, bool>& e) -> bool {
return e.first == id; });
but my question is, what are exactly the inner workings of std::remove_if that impose the elements of the container not being const?
The general std::remove_if shuffles item values around to put the logically erased values at the end of the sequence (it's typically used in combination with member function erase to actually remove the logically erased values). It can't do that shuffling when an item isn't copyable or movable. Instead use std::list::remove_if.
If you look at the type and iterator requirements of std::remove_if, you can see that the implementation must be similar to the following (from the link above):
template<class ForwardIt, class UnaryPredicate>
ForwardIt remove_if(ForwardIt first, ForwardIt last, UnaryPredicate p)
{
first = std::find_if(first, last, p);
if (first != last)
for(ForwardIt i = first; ++i != last; )
if (!p(*i))
*first++ = std::move(*i);
return first;
}
I.e., the algorithm assumes only that the iterators have forward capabilities, and elements are moveable, and it moves elements around. Of course, moves can't be done on const objects.
I have a set of shared_ptr, and I'd like to use remove_copy_if with a custom function object for the predicate. I didn't know the "best" way to do it. Right now, I've got this working:
class CellInCol : public std::unary_function<const std::shared_ptr<Cell>,
bool>
{
public:
CellInCol( size_t col ) : _col( col ) {}
bool operator() ( const std::shared_ptr<Cell> &a ) const
{
return ( a->GetX() == _col );
}
private:
size_t _col;
};
typedef std::set<std::shared_ptr<Cell>, CellSorter> Container;
Container _grid;
// initialization omitted...
Puzzle::Container Puzzle::GetCol( size_t c )
{
Cell::Validate( c, 1, 9 );
Container col;
std::remove_copy_if( _grid.begin(), _grid.end(),
std::inserter( col, col.begin() ),
std::not1( CellInCol( c ) ) );
return col;
}
I decided to do const references to shared_ptr because the object won't hold on to the pointer and this just seemed more efficient than an extra copy of the shared_ptr.
It seems like it would be better to just take const references to the objects, but I couldn't get it to compile. I changed it to this, but no luck:
class CellInCol : public std::unary_function<const Cell,
bool>
{
public:
CellInCol( size_t col ) : _col( col ) {}
// note use of const ref to shared_ptr's
bool operator() ( const Cell &a ) const
{
return ( a.GetX() == _col );
}
private:
size_t _col;
};
Here is the output from g++:
In file included from /usr/include/c++/4.4/algorithm:62,
from /usr/include/c++/4.4/valarray:41,
from Puzzle.h:5,
from Puzzle.cpp:2:
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h: In function ‘_OIter std::remove_copy_if(_IIter, _IIter, _OIter, _Predicate) [with _IIter = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> >, _OIter = std::insert_iterator<std::set<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>, Sudoku::CellSorter, std::allocator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> > > >, _Predicate = std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInRow>]’:
Puzzle.cpp:100: instantiated from here
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h:938: error: no match for call to ‘(std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInRow>) (const std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>&)’
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_function.h:357: note: candidates are: bool std::unary_negate<_Predicate>::operator()(const typename _Predicate::argument_type&) const [with _Predicate = Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInRow]
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h: In function ‘_OIter std::remove_copy_if(_IIter, _IIter, _OIter, _Predicate) [with _IIter = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> >, _OIter = std::insert_iterator<std::set<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>, Sudoku::CellSorter, std::allocator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> > > >, _Predicate = std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInCol>]’:
Puzzle.cpp:110: instantiated from here
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h:938: error: no match for call to ‘(std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInCol>) (const std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>&)’
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_function.h:357: note: candidates are: bool std::unary_negate<_Predicate>::operator()(const typename _Predicate::argument_type&) const [with _Predicate = Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInCol]
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h: In function ‘_OIter std::remove_copy_if(_IIter, _IIter, _OIter, _Predicate) [with _IIter = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> >, _OIter = std::insert_iterator<std::set<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>, Sudoku::CellSorter, std::allocator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> > > >, _Predicate = std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInBlock>]’:
Puzzle.cpp:121: instantiated from here
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h:938: error: no match for call to ‘(std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInBlock>) (const std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>&)’
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_function.h:357: note: candidates are: bool std::unary_negate<_Predicate>::operator()(const typename _Predicate::argument_type&) const [with _Predicate = Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellInBlock]
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h: In function ‘_OIter std::remove_copy_if(_IIter, _IIter, _OIter, _Predicate) [with _IIter = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> >, _OIter = std::insert_iterator<std::set<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>, Sudoku::CellSorter, std::allocator<std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell> > > >, _Predicate = std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellIsNeighbor>]’:
Puzzle.cpp:154: instantiated from here
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algo.h:938: error: no match for call to ‘(std::unary_negate<Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellIsNeighbor>) (const std::shared_ptr<Sudoku::Cell>&)’
/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_function.h:357: note: candidates are: bool std::unary_negate<_Predicate>::operator()(const typename _Predicate::argument_type&) const [with _Predicate = Sudoku::<unnamed>::CellIsNeighbor]
make: *** [Puzzle.o] Error 1
Is there another way to do it, or any suggestions?
First of all, since you're using the C++0x features (std::shared_ptr), it makes sense to use std::copy_if() to avoid having to call std::not1.
The first functor you wrote works, and a minimal compilable example would be something like this: https://ideone.com/XhuNu
The second functor does not work, as the compiler points out, due to mismatch between its argument_type (which is const Cell) and the argument that it is being called with, which is const std::shared_ptr<Cell>&.
It's simply not what the container contains! For all it knows at this point, those Cell objects may not even be copyable.
The second functor would indeed be a better thing to use if the container is a set of Cells, not a set of shared pointers to Cells. It is considered good design to avoid shared ownership of objects anyway.
Example code that would compile with the second functor
#include <set>
#include <functional>
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
struct Cell {
int mX;
Cell(int x) : mX(x) {}
size_t GetX() const { return mX;}
};
struct CellSorter {
bool operator()(const Cell& l, const Cell& r) const
{
return l.GetX() < r.GetX();
}
};
// your second functor begins
class CellInCol : public std::unary_function<const Cell,
bool>
{
public:
CellInCol( size_t col ) : _col( col ) {}
// note use of const ref to shared_ptr's
bool operator() ( const Cell &a ) const
{
return ( a.GetX() == _col );
}
private:
size_t _col;
};
// your second functor ends
int main()
{
typedef std::set<Cell, CellSorter> Container;
Container _grid = {Cell(1), Cell(2), Cell(7), Cell(10)};
Container col;
size_t c = 7;
std::remove_copy_if( _grid.begin(), _grid.end(),
std::inserter( col, col.begin() ),
std::not1( CellInCol( c ) ) );
std::cout << "col has " << col.size() << " elements\n"
<< "the first element is " << col.begin()->GetX() << '\n';
}
test run: https://ideone.com/kLiFn
You could use boost::make_indirect_iterator to make std::remove_copy_if work on the Cells instead of the shared_ptrs. However, since the algorithm would be working on the Cells directly, the output iterator would also have to take Cells and not shared_ptrs. Which means the output collection would have to be a collection of Cells.
If you want to store shared_ptrs, you'd have to transform the predicate somehow. You can use boost::lambda to do just that.
Cubbi's example modified to use boost::lambda:
#include <memory>
#include <set>
#include <functional>
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
#include <boost/shared_ptr.hpp>
#include <boost/lambda/lambda.hpp>
#include <boost/lambda/bind.hpp>
struct Cell {
int mX;
Cell(int x) : mX(x) {}
size_t GetX() const { return mX;}
};
struct CellSorter {
bool operator()(const boost::shared_ptr<Cell>& l, const boost::shared_ptr<Cell>& r) const
{
return l->GetX() < r->GetX();
}
};
class CellInCol : public std::unary_function<Cell, bool>
{
public:
CellInCol( size_t col ) : _col( col ) {}
// note use of const ref to shared_ptr's
bool operator() ( const Cell &a ) const
{
return ( a.GetX() == _col );
}
private:
size_t _col;
};
int main()
{
typedef std::set<boost::shared_ptr<Cell>, CellSorter> Container;
Container _grid;
_grid.insert( boost::shared_ptr<Cell>(new Cell(1)));
_grid.insert( boost::shared_ptr<Cell>(new Cell(2)));
_grid.insert( boost::shared_ptr<Cell>(new Cell(7)));
_grid.insert( boost::shared_ptr<Cell>(new Cell(10)));
Container col;
size_t c = 7;
std::remove_copy_if(
_grid.begin(),
_grid.end(),
std::inserter( col, col.begin() ),
!boost::lambda::bind(CellInCol(c), *boost::lambda::_1) // <------ :^)
);
std::cout << "col has " << col.size() << " elements\n"
<< " the first element is " << (*col.begin())->GetX() << '\n';
}
(ideone's C++0x compiler doesn't know it's boost, so I changed std::shared_ptr to boost::shared_ptr, but that should make no difference)
http://www.ideone.com/mtMUj
ps:
I decided to do const references to shared_ptr because the object won't hold on to the pointer and this just seemed more efficient than an extra copy of the shared_ptr.
Yes, you should (almost) always pass shared_ptrs as reference-to-const, it makes a huge difference. Copying a shared_ptr on a platform with threads means at least one atomic instruction (CAS, atomic-increment or something similar), and those can be rather expensive. (And of course destroying the copy will be equally expensive)
The only exception I can think of would be if the function will copy the shared_ptr. In that case you could either take it by value and use swap() to "copy" it, or provide an rvalue-reference overload. (If the function doesn't always copy the shared_ptr, the rvalue-reference overload would be the preferred solution).
Of course it doesn't make a big difference if the function is expensive anyway, but if it's a very cheap function that might get inlined and is called in a thight loop, the difference can be quite noticeable.
I wrote a piece of code and used map and vector but it shows me something I can't get. I'll be thankful if someone help me in this way and correct my code or give me some hints.
The code is:
// For each node in N, calculate the reachability, i.e., the
// number of nodes in N2 which are not yet covered by at
// least one node in the MPR set, and which are reachable
// through this 1-hop neighbor
std::map<int, std::vector<const NeighborTuple *> > reachability;
std::set<int> rs;
for (NeighborSet::iterator it = N.begin(); it != N.end(); it++)
{
NeighborTuple const &nb_tuple = *it;
int r = 0;
for (TwoHopNeighborSet::iterator it2 = N2.begin (); it2 != N2.end (); it2++)
{
TwoHopNeighborTuple const &nb2hop_tuple = *it2;
if (nb_tuple.neighborMainAddr == nb2hop_tuple.neighborMainAddr)
r++;
}
rs.insert (r);
reachability[r].push_back (&nb_tuple);
}
/*******************************************************************************/
//for keepping exposition of a node
std::map<Vector, std::vector<const NeighborTuple *> > position;
std::set<Vector> pos;
for (NeighborSet::iterator it = N.begin(); it != N.end(); it++)
{
NeighborTuple nb_tuple = *it;
Vector exposition;
pos.insert (exposition);
position[exposition].push_back (&nb_tuple);
}
and the errors are for this line: position[exposition].push_back (&nb_tuple);
and the errors are:
/usr/include/c++/4.1.2/bits/stl_function.h: In member function ‘bool std::less<_
Tp>::operator()(const _Tp&, const _Tp&) const [with _Tp = ns3::Vector3D]’:
/usr/include/c++/4.1.2/bits/stl_map.h:347: instantiated from ‘_Tp& std::map<_K
ey, _Tp, _Compare, _Alloc>::operator[](const _Key&) [with _Key = ns3::Vector3D, _Tp = std::vector<const ns3::olsr::NeighborTuple*, std::allocator<const ns3::olsr::NeighborTuple*> >, _Compare = std::less<ns3::Vector3D>, _Alloc = std::allocator<std::pair<const ns3::Vector3D, std::vector<const ns3::olsr::NeighborTuple*, std::allocator<const ns3::olsr::NeighborTuple*> > > >]’
../src/routing/olsr/olsr-routing-protocol.cc:853: instantiated from here
/usr/include/c++/4.1.2/bits/stl_function.h:227: error: no match for ‘operator<’ in ‘__x < __y’
debug/ns3/ipv6-address.h:432: note: candidates are: bool ns3::operator<(const ns3::Ipv6Address&, const ns3::Ipv6Address&)
debug/ns3/nstime.h:475: note: bool ns3::operator<(const ns3::Time&, const ns3::Time&)
debug/ns3/ipv4-address.h:305: note: bool ns3::operator<(const ns3::Ipv4Address&, const ns3::Ipv4Address&)
debug/ns3/address.h:231: note: bool ns3::operator<(const ns3::Address&, const ns3::Address&)
debug/ns3/type-id.h:376: note: bool ns3::operator<(ns3::TypeId, ns3::TypeId)
Thanks in advance.
Bahar
std::map is a sorted container of pairs. As such, keys in the map must have operator <() defined. Make sure Vector has the less-than operator defined.
For example:
class Vector {
int len, ang;
friend bool operator<(const Vector&, const Vector&);
};
bool operator<(const Vector& v1, const Vector& v2)
{
return true_if_v1_is_less_than_v2(); // you define what "less than" means
}
Of course, there other ways to do this. You may make operator< a member function. Or you may have the two member data public and the operator a non-member, non-friend function. Or you may define operator< in an anonymous namespace, to enhance information hiding. Or you may use a comparator other than operator<.
You declared the position object as followed : std::map<Vector, std::vector<const NeighborTuple *> > position;
And you are trying to push NeighborTuple * inside...
Try using const NeighborTuple *
I notice that you seem to have a pushback line that compiles and a line that does not.
The difference might be that you have a const in the first case
NeighborTuple const &nb_tuple = *it;
I've got an error while using find() function. Here is the code:
#include <iostream>
#include <map>
#define N 100000
using namespace std;
int main (int argc, char * const argv[]) {
map<int,int> m;
for (int i=0; i<N; i++) m[i]=i;
find(m.begin(), m.end(), 5);
return 0;
}
I'm getting an compiller error:
error: no match for 'operator==' in '__first. __gnu_debug::_Safe_iterator<_Iterator, _Sequence>::operator* [with _Iterator = std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<const int, int> >, _Sequence = __gnu_debug_def::map<int, int, std::less<int>, std::allocator<std::pair<const int, int> > >]() == __val'
Including 'algorithm' nothing changes. Compiling in VS2008 shows similar error.
I know about m.find(), but I realy need to use find() too.
Thanks a lot for your assistance!
P.S. Actualy, the task is to compare speed of m.find(5) and find(m.begin(), m.end(), 5), so I need to make both of them work properly.
begin() and end() on all STL containers provide access to elements of those collections. Type of those elements is known as value_type of the container. For std::map<Key, Value>, its value_type is std::pair<Key, Value>. Therefore, your find function is trying to find a pair<int, int> which is equal to 5. Since there's no operator== defined to compare pair<int, int> and int, you get the error.
The correct way to do this (so long as you want to avoid member find()) is to use std::find_if:
template <class First>
struct first_equal
{
const First value;
first_equal(const First& value)
: value(value)
{
}
template <class Second>
bool operator() (const std::pair<First, Second>& pair) const
{
return pair.first == value;
}
};
...
find_if(m.begin(), m.end(), first_equal<int>(5));
You could also overload operator== for pair and int to do what you want, but it's a very hackish way (because it will affect all your code, and because such a comparison has no meaning in general).
find() requires a parameter that can be compared to *iterator. For your map, this will be pair<int,int>. You'll need to create a dummy pair, plus a comparison functor to compare the pairs.
Just use m.find(5)