C++ class member function callback - c++

I have the following problem. I have a function from an external library (which cannot be modified) like this:
void externalFunction(int n, void udf(double*) );
I would like to pass as the udf function above a function member of an existing class. Please look at the following code:
// External function (tipically from an external library)
void externalFunction(int n, void udf(double*) )
{
// do something
}
// User Defined Function (UDF)
void myUDF(double* a)
{
// do something
}
// Class containing the User Defined Function (UDF)
class myClass
{
public:
void classUDF(double* a)
{
// do something...
};
};
int main()
{
int n=1;
// The UDF to be supplied is myUDF
externalFunction(n, myUDF);
// The UDF is the classUDF member function of a myClass object
myClass myClassObj;
externalFunction(n, myClassObj.classUDF); // ERROR!!
}
I cannot declare the classUDF member function as a static function, so the last line of the code above results in a compilation error!

This is impossible to do - in c++, you must use either a free function, or a static member function, or (in c++11) a lambda without capture to get a function pointer.
GCC allows you to create nested function which could do what you want, but only in C. It uses so-called trampolines to do that (basically small pieces of dynamically generated code). It would be possible to use this feature, but only if you split some of the code calling externalFunction to a separate C module.
Another possibility would be generating code at runtime eg. using libjit.
So if you're fine with non-reenrant function, create a global/static variable which will point to this and use it in your static function.
class myClass
{
public:
static myClass* callback_this;
static void classUDF(double* a)
{
callback_this.realUDF(a);
};
};
Its really horrible code, but I'm afraid you're out of luck with such a bad design as your externalFunction.

You can use Boost bind or TR1 bind (on recent compilers);;
externalFunction(n, boost::bind(&myClass::classUDF, boost::ref(myClassObj)));
Unfortunately, I lived in a pipe dream for the last 10 minutes. The only way forward is to call the target using some kind of a static wrapper function. The other answers have various neat (compiler-specific) tidbits on that, but here's the main trick:
void externalFunction(int n, void (*udf)(double*) )
{ double x; udf(&x); }
myClass myClassObj;
void wrapper(double* d) { myClassObj.classUDF(d); }
int main()
{
externalFunction(1, &wrapper);
}
std::function<>
Store a bound function in a variable like this:
std::function<void(double*)> stored = std::bind(&myClass::classUDF, boost::ref(myClassObj))
(assuming C++0x support in compiler now. I'm sure Boost has a boost::function<> somewhere)
Vanilla C++ pointers-to-member-function
Without magic like that, you'd need pointer-to-memberfunction syntax:
See also live on http://ideone.com/Ld7It
Edit to clarify to the commenters, obviously this only works iff you have control over the definition of externalFunction. This is in direct response to the /broken/ snippet int the OP.
struct myClass
{
void classUDF(double* a) { };
};
void externalFunction(int n, void (myClass::*udf)(double*) )
{
myClass myClassObj;
double x;
(myClassObj.*udf)(&x);
}
int main()
{
externalFunction(1, &myClass::classUDF);
}
C++98 idiomatic solution
// mem_fun_ref example
#include <iostream>
#include <functional>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
#include <string>
int main ()
{
std::vector<std::string> numbers;
// populate vector:
numbers.push_back("one");
numbers.push_back("two");
numbers.push_back("three");
numbers.push_back("four");
numbers.push_back("five");
std::vector <int> lengths (numbers.size());
std::transform (numbers.begin(), numbers.end(), lengths.begin(),
std::mem_fun_ref(&std::string::length));
for (int i=0; i<5; i++) {
std::cout << numbers[i] << " has " << lengths[i] << " letters.\n";
}
return 0;
}

Here is how I do this, when MyClass is a singleton:
void externalFunction(int n, void udf(double) );
class MyClass
{
public:
static MyClass* m_this;
MyClass(){ m_this = this; }
static void mycallback(double* x){ m_this->myrealcallback(x); }
void myrealcallback(double* x);
}
int main()
{
MyClass myClass;
externalFunction(0, MyClass::mycallback);
}

Related

C++ Initialization of static function pointer array

I want to create a static function pointer array, so I can jump to a certain function regarding a received index. Like an index jumper.
So imagine a class like this:
Class A
{
private:
static void 1stFunction();
static void 2ndFunction();
static void(*functionPointer[20])(void);
};
Then I would like that functionPointer to get the value of the 1stFunction and 2ndFunction, and maybe even more.
So, how do I initialize it?
As far as I know, when a static member is declared, you can use it even before an instance is created. So I though, lets initialize that function pointer, so later I can call it like this
functionPointer[receivedIndex]();
So i tried to initilize it like this, in the same .h file
void (*A::functionPointer[])(void) =
{
A::1stFunction,
A::2ndFunction,
};
But the compiler gives me redifinition, it says it's already created.
So, pretty sure I'm missing something. I don't know though, if it is syntax or simply it is not possible to do it this way.
I know that function pointers to class's member functions are different than normal function pointers... But this is a static function, so I believe it doesn't belong to an instance and therefore it should work with normal function pointers.
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks
The following would be a working example that probably achieves what you need.
You need C++11 for the initializer list.
It is a good practice to initialize the static member in the cpp file, as you don't want to have a definition of the static member everytime the header is included (this can lead to linking issues).
You can call callf with the desired index and have the corresponding function called, based on the initialization of the function pointer array.
The output of the program would be:
I am 2ndFunction
Header file
class A
{
private:
static void Function1();
static void Function2();
static void(*functionPointer[20])();
public:
static void callf(int index);
};
Implementation
#include <iostream>
#include "ex.h"
void(*A::functionPointer[20])() {
A::Function1,
A::Function2
};
void A::Function1() {
std::cout << "I am 1stFunction" << std::endl;
}
void A::Function2() {
std::cout << "I am 2ndFunction" << std::endl;
}
void A::callf(int index) {
A::functionPointer[index]();
}
int main(int argc, char const *argv[]) {
A::callf(1);
return 0;
}
Here you have a more modern C++ approach (C++14 needed)
I would advise you to explore lambda functions if you are not restricted to C++03.
#include <iostream>
#include <functional>
#include <vector>
class A {
public:
using f_type = std::function<void(void)>;
f_type f1 = []() { std::cout << "f0" << std::endl;};
f_type f2 = []() { std::cout << "f1" << std::endl;};
static void f3() { std::cout << "f3" << std::endl; }
std::vector<f_type> functions{f1, f2, f3};
};
int main() {
A a;
a.functions[0]();
a.functions[1]();
//adding custom lambda
a.functions.emplace_back([](){ std::cout << "custom f" << std::endl;});
a.functions[2]();
return 0;
}
you can add both functions and lambdas to your container.

C++ Creating a function that is being pointed to as an argument

So this is confusing to explain, but I will try my best.
I have a function one of my classes that takes a function pointer as an argument, and what I would like to do is define the function as part of the argument. ie:
object->setFunctionPointer({string a = ""; return a;});
Is this possible? if so, what is the proper syntax of this?
In C++11, you can do it. You can use C++ lambda (anonymous functions).
See the sample code at http://ideone.com/8ZTWSU
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
typedef const char * (*funcptr)();
funcptr s;
void setFuncPtr(funcptr t)
{
s = t;
}
int main() {
// your code goes here
setFuncPtr([]{return "Hello \n"; });
printf("%s\n", s());
return 0;
}
If we are talking about C++ you should use std::function and not function pointers. Unless you are interfacing with C APIs.
class Foo{
SetFunc(std::function<void(int)> func)
{
m_func = func;
}
private:
std::function<void(int)> m_func;
};
If your function is a member of a class, you cannot take an ordinary function pointer to store its address. What you need is a delegate; which are specialised function pointers for methods. Search the internet for C++ delegate and you should find numerous examples.
(Note: maybe there is an exception for static methods; I don't remember.)
Here is a complete example. Since c++11 this is the way to go:
#include<functional>
#include<string>
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
class Object
{
public:
void setFunctionPointer(function<string(void)> function)
{
m_function = function;
}
string run()
{
return m_function();
}
private:
function<string(void)> m_function;
};
int main(int argc, char**argv)
{
Object *object = new Object;
object->setFunctionPointer([]{string a = "FOO"; return a;}); // here is the function assignment
cout << object->run() << endl;
delete object;
}
When run this prints FOO to stdout.

How can I generate a compile-time array of interrupt handlers in C++?

I'd like to be able to write my ISR in one place:
some_collection TimerHandlers;
// added to ISR table in linker script
void rawTimerIRQHandler() {
call_each_handler_in(handlers);
}
Such that I can then register handlers in other files
// file1.cpp
void ledTimerHandler1() {
}
register(ledTimerHandler1); //or in an init function if not possible here
// file2.cpp
void ledTimerHandler2() {
}
register(ledTimerHandler2); //or in an init function if not possible here
And when the hardware jumps to rawTimerIRQHandler, it executes ledTimerHandler1 and ledTimerHandler2 in some arbitrary order.
Obviously, I can implement this using something similar to a vector<void(*)()>, but since the number of these handlers is known at compile-time, is there any way I can generate an array (or template linked list) at compile-time? I'd like to avoid the dynamic memory allocation that comes with vector.
I'm open to using template<>, #define, or even GCC-specific attributes to acheive this goal.
The scaffolding's a bit tedious but once it's done the usage couldn't be simpler:
// example.h:
#include "Registered.h"
struct example : Registered<example> {};
// main.cc:
#include <iostream>
#include "example.h"
int main ()
{
for ( auto p = example::registry; p; p=p->chain )
std::cout << p << '\n';
}
// Registered.h :
template<class registered>
struct Registered {
static registered *registry;
registered *chain;
Registered() : chain(registry) {registry=static_cast<registered*>(this);}
};
// example.cc:
#include "example.h"
template<> example *Registered<example>::registry = 0;
static struct example first, second, third; // these can be defined anywhere w/ static duration
edit: moved the first,second,third declaration/definitions to satisfy my inner pedant
Absolutley. If I understand correctly, you just want a fixed array of function pointers to your handlers. Using C++11 syntax, and assuming 3 handlers just for the sake of the example,
#include <array>
const std::array<HandlerPtr, 3> handlers= {&ledTimerHandler1, &ledTimerHandler2, &ledTimerHandler3};
or using more classic C/C++ syntax
const HandlerPtr handlers[] = {&ledTimerHandler1, &ledTimerHandler2, &ledTimerHandler3};
Based off jthill's answer, here's what I'll probably end up using (since I don't need a generic form):
struct timer_handler {
static timer_handler *first = 0;
timer_handler *next;
void (*f)();
public:
timer_handler(void (*f)()) : next(first), f(f) { first = this;}
// connect this to the interrupt vector
static inline void executeAll() {
auto p = first;
while(p) {
p->f();
p = p->next;
}
}
};
//a.cpp
void foo() {
}
timer_handler tfoo = foo;
//b.cpp
void bar() {
}
timer_handler tbar = bar;

Function calls with class members?

Before I present the code which is found at the bottom of this post I would like to talk about the issue and the fix's that I do not desire. Okay basically I've created a GUI from scratch sort of and one requirement I wanted for this was allow components to have their own click executions so if i click a button or tab etc.. It would call Component->Execute(); Well normally you would do something like a switch statement of ids and if that components ID equaled n number then it would perform this action. Well that seemed kinda dumb to me and I thought there has to be a better way. I eventually tried to incorporate a feature in JAVA where you would do like Component.AddActionListener(new ActionListener( public void execute(ActionEvent ae) { })); or something like that and I thought that this feature has to be possible in C++. I eventually came across storing void functions into a variable in which could be executed at any time and modified at any time. However I hadn't noticed an issue and that was this only worked with static functions. So below you'll see my problem. I've patched the problem by using a pointer to SomeClass however this would mean having an individual function call for every class type is there no way to store a function callback to a non-static class member without doing the below strategy? and instead doing a strategy like the commented out code?
//Main.cpp
#include <iostream> //system requires this.
#include "SomeClass.h"
void DoSomething1(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Static DoSomething1\n";
}
void DoSomething2(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Static DoSomething2\n";
}
int main()
{
void (*function_call2)(SomeClass*);
void (*function_call)() = DoSomething1; //This works No Problems!
function_call(); //Will Call the DoSomething1(void);
function_call = DoSomething2; //This works No Problems!
function_call(); //Will Call the DoSomething2(void);
SomeClass *some = new SomeClass(); //Create a SomeClass pointer;
function_call = SomeClass::DoSomething3; //Static SomeClass::DoSomething3();
function_call(); //Will Call the SomeClass::DoSomething3(void);
//function_call = some->DoSomething4; //Non-Static SomeClass::DoSomething4 gives an error.
//function_call(); //Not used because of error above.
function_call2 = SomeClass::DoSomething5; //Store the SomeClass::DoSomething(SomeClass* some);
function_call2(some); //Call out SomeClass::DoSomething5 which calls on SomeClass::DoSomething4's non static member.
system("pause");
return 0;
}
//SomeClass.hpp
#pragma once
#include <iostream>
class SomeClass
{
public:
SomeClass();
~SomeClass();
public:
static void DoSomething3(void);
void DoSomething4(void);
static void DoSomething5(SomeClass* some);
};
//SomeClass.cpp
#include "SomeClass.h"
SomeClass::SomeClass(void)
{
}
SomeClass::~SomeClass(void)
{
}
void SomeClass::DoSomething3(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Static DoSomething3\n";
}
void SomeClass::DoSomething4(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Non-Static DoSomething4\n";
}
void SomeClass::DoSomething5(SomeClass *some)
{
some->DoSomething4();
}
Secondary Fix for what I'll do not an exact answer I wanted but it meets my needs for now along with allowing additional features which would have become overly complicate had this not existed.
//Component.hpp
#pragma once
#include <iostream>
#include <windows.h>
#include <d3dx9.h>
#include <d3d9.h>
#include "Constants.hpp"
#include "ScreenState.hpp"
#include "ComponentType.hpp"
using namespace std;
class Component
{
static void EMPTY(void) { }
static void EMPTY(int i) { }
public:
Component(void)
{
callback = EMPTY;
callback2 = EMPTY;
callback_id = -1;
}
Component* SetFunction(void (*callback)())
{
this->callback = callback;
return this;
}
Component* SetFunction(void (*callback2)(int), int id)
{
this->callback_id = id;
this->callback2 = callback2;
return this;
}
void execute(void)
{
callback();
callback2(callback_id);
}
}
The syntax for pointers-to-member-functions is as follows:
struct Foo
{
void bar(int, int);
void zip(int, int);
};
Foo x;
void (Foo::*p)(int, int) = &Foo::bar; // pointer
(x.*p)(1, 2); // invocation
p = &Foo::zip;
(x.*p)(3, 4); // invocation
Mind the additional parentheses in the function invocation, which is needed to get the correct operator precedence. The member-dereference operator is .* (and there's also ->* from an instance pointer).

C++ : unresolved overloaded function when using function pointers

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class B
{
public:
int getMsg(int i)
{
return i + 1;
}
};
class A
{
B b;
public:
void run()
{
taunt(b.getMsg);
}
void taunt(int (*msg)(int))
{
cout << (*msg)(1) << endl;
}
};
int main()
{
A a;
a.run();
}
The above code has a class B inside a class A, and class A has a method taunt that takes a function as an argument. class B's getMsg is passed into taunt...The above code generated the following error message: "error: no matching function for call to 'A::taunt()'"
What's causing the error message in the above code? Am I missing something?
Update:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class B
{
public:
int getMsg(int i)
{
return i + 1;
}
};
class A
{
B b;
public:
void run()
{
taunt(b.getMsg);
}
void taunt(int (B::*msg)(int))
{
cout << (*msg)(1) << endl;
}
};
int main()
{
A a;
a.run();
}
t.cpp: In member function 'void A::run()':
Line 19: error: no matching function for call to 'A::taunt()'
compilation terminated due to -Wfatal-errors.
I'm still getting the same error after changing (*msg)(int) to (B::*msg)(int)
b.getMsg is not the correct way to form a pointer to member, you need &B::getMsg.
(*msg)(1) is not the correct way to call a function through a pointer to member you need to specify an object to call the function on, e.g. (using a temporary) (B().*msg)(1).
The right way to do such things in OOP is to use interfaces so all you need to do is to define an interface and implement it in B class after that pass the pointer of instance which implements this interface to your method in class A.
class IB{
public:
virtual void doSomething()=0;
};
class B: public IB{
public:
virtual void doSomething(){...}
};
class A{
public:
void doSomethingWithB(IB* b){b->doSomething();}
};
This works in VS 2010. The output is the same on all lines:
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
#include <functional>
using namespace std;
using namespace std::placeholders;
class A
{
public:
int foo(int a, float b)
{
return int(a*b);
}
};
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
A temp;
int x = 5;
float y = 3.5;
auto a = std::mem_fn(&A::foo);
cout << a(&temp, x, y) << endl;
auto b = std::bind(a, &temp, x, y);
cout << b() << endl;
auto c = std::bind(std::mem_fn(&A::foo), &temp, _1, y);
cout << c(5) << endl;
}
Basically, you use std::mem_fn to get your callable object for the member function, and then std::bind if you want to bind additional parameters, including the object pointer itself. I'm pretty sure there's a way to use std::ref to encapsulate a reference to the object too if you'd prefer that. I also included the _1 forwarding marker just for another way to specify some parameters in the bind, but not others. You could even specify everything BUT the class instance if you wanted the same parameters to everything but have it work on different objects. Up to you.
If you'd rather use boost::bind it recognizes member functions and you can just put it all on one line a bit to be a bit shorter: auto e = boost::bind(&A::foo, &temp, x, y) but obviously it's not much more to use completely std C++11 calls either.