I have the following and having difficulty resolving the error please help.
i have the following class as template definition somewhere.
template<class ConcreteHandlerType>
class SomeAcceptor: public ACE_Acceptor<ConcreteHandlerType, ACE_SOCK_Acceptor>
In some other file, i initialize this class in the constructor
class initialize {
typedef SomeAcceptor<BaseClassSomeHandler> baseAcceptor_t;
typedef SomeAcceptor<DerivedClassSomeHandler> derivedAcceptor_t;
boost::shared_ptr<baseAcceptor_t;> mAcceptor;
boost::shared_ptr<derivedAcceptor_t;> mDerivedAcceptor;
bool HandleAcceptNotification(BaseClassSomeHandler& someHandler);
initialize() : mAcceptor(0), mDerivedAcceptor(new DerivedAcceptor_t) {
mAcceptor->SetAcceptNotificationDelegate(fastdelegate::MakeDelegate(this, &initialize::HandleAcceptNotification));
}
}
Error i get is
error: no matching function for call to `boost::shared_ptr<SomeAcceptor<BaseClassSomeHandler> >::shared_ptr(int)'common/lib/boost_1_39_0/boost/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.hpp:160: note: candidates are: boost::shared_ptr<SomeAcceptor<BaseClassSomeHandler> >::shared_ptr(const boost::shared_ptr<SomeAcceptor<BaseClassSomeHandler> >&)
common/lib/boost_1_39_0/boost/smart_ptr/shared_ptr.hpp:173: notboost::shared_ptr<T>::shared_ptr() [with T = SomeAcceptor<BaseClassSomeHandler>]
I also tried overloading the function with
bool HandleAcceptNotification(DerivedClassSomeHandler& someHandler);
but because mAcceptor is of type SomeAcceptor BaseClassSomeHandler, i get this error, but to fix this.
I guess i need to cast it somehow, but how to do it?
i tried doing like below inside the constructor and it didn't work
initialize() : mAcceptor(0), mDerivedAcceptor(new DerivedAcceptor_t) {
mAcceptor = mDerivedAcceptor; // Error here
mAcceptor->SetAcceptNotificationDelegate(fastdelegate::MakeDelegate(this, &initialize::HandleAcceptNotification));
}
From your code, it looks like you want mAcceptor to be assigned NULL (0), if that is the case you don't need to initialize it at all, as the default constructor will take care of that. But, since you call a function on that (NULL) pointer immediately, its not immediately clear exactly what you want to do.
If you want mAcceptor and mDerivedAcceptor to point to the same (shared) object and assuming DerivedClassSomeHandler is derived from BaseClassSomeHandler, this is a situation where you should use boost::shared_static_cast, as described here.
There's also some good information in this apparently related question.
The error is due to the mAcceptor(0) in
initialize() : mAcceptor(0), mDerivedAcceptor(new DerivedAcceptor_t) {
mAcceptor->SetAcceptNotificationDelegate(fastdelegate::MakeDelegate(this, &initialize::HandleAcceptNotification));
}
The smart_ptr default constructor assigns the wrapped ptr to NULL, so leave out mAcceptor(0) from the initialization list.
boost::shared_ptr<SomeAcceptor<BaseClassSomeHandler> >::shared_ptr(int)
It's yelling at you that there's no constructor that accepts an int.
Just use: mAcceptor()
Related
This is my first experience with downcasting in C++ and I just can't understand the problem.
AInstruction and CInstruction inherit from AssemblerInstruction.
Parser takes the info in its ctor and creates one of those derived instruction types for its mInstruction member (accessed by getInstruction). In the program, a method of the base AssemblerInstruction class is used, for happy polymorphism.
But when I want to test that the Parser has created the correct instruction, I need to query the derived instruction members, which means I need to downcast parser.getInstruction() to an AInstruction or CInstruction.
As far as I can tell this needs to be done using a bunch of pointers and references. This is how I can get the code to compile:
TEST(ParserA, parsesBuiltInConstants)
{
AssemblerInstruction inst = Parser("#R3", 0).getInstruction();
EXPECT_EQ(inst.getInstructionType(), AssemblerInstruction::InstructionType::A);
AssemblerInstruction* i = &(inst);
AInstruction* a = dynamic_cast<AInstruction*>(i);
EXPECT_EQ(a->getLine(), "R3");
}
Running this gives this error:
unknown file: error: SEH exception with code 0xc0000005 thrown in the test body.
And stepping through the code, when the debugger is on the final line of the function, a is pointing to
0x00000000 <NULL>.
I imagine this is an instance where I don't have a full enough understanding of C++, meaning that I could be making a n00b mistake. Or maybe it's some bigger crazy problem. Help?
Update
I've been able to make this work by making mInstruction into a (dumb) pointer:
// in parser, when parsing
mInstructionPtr = new AInstruction(assemblyCode.substr(1), lineNumber);
// elsewhere in AssemblerInstruction.cpp
AssemblerInstruction* AssemblyParser::getInstructionPtr() { return mInstructionPtr; }
TEST(ParserA, parsesBuiltInConstants)
{
auto ptr = Parser("#R3", 0).getInstructionPtr();
AInstruction* a = dynamic_cast<AInstruction*>(ptr);
EXPECT_EQ(a->getLine(), "R3");
}
However I have trouble implementing it with a unique_ptr:
(I'm aware that mInstruction (non-pointer) is redundant, as are two types of pointers. I'll get rid of it later when I clean all this up)
class AssemblyParser
{
public:
AssemblyParser(std::string assemblyCode, unsigned int lineNumber);
AssemblerInstruction getInstruction();
std::unique_ptr<AssemblerInstruction> getUniqueInstructionPtr();
AssemblerInstruction* getInstructionPtr();
private:
AssemblerInstruction mInstruction;
std::unique_ptr<AssemblerInstruction> mUniqueInstructionPtr;
AssemblerInstruction* mInstructionPtr;
};
// in AssemblyParser.cpp
// in parser as in example above. this works fine.
mUniqueInstructionPtr = make_unique<AInstruction>(assemblyCode.substr(1), lineNumber);
// this doesn't compile!!!
unique_ptr<AssemblerInstruction> AssemblyParser::getUniqueInstructionPtr()
{
return mUniqueInstructionPtr;
}
In getUniqueInstructionPtr, there is a squiggle under mUniqueInstructionPtr with this error:
'std::unique_ptr<AssemblerInstruction,std::default_delete>::unique_ptr(const std::unique_ptr<AssemblerInstruction,std::default_delete> &)': attempting to reference a deleted function
What!? I haven't declared any functions as deleted or defaulted!
You can not downcast an object to something which doesn't match it's dynamic type. In your code,
AssemblerInstruction inst = Parser("#R3", 0).getInstruction();
inst has a fixed type, which is AssemblerInstruction. Downcasting it to AInstruction leads to undefined behavior - manifested as crash - because that is not what it is.
If you want your getInstruction to return a dynamically-typed object, it has to return a [smart] pointer to base class, while constructing an object of derived class. Something like that (pseudo code):
std::unique_ptr<AssemblerInstruction> getInstruction(...) {
return std::make_unique<AInstruction>(...);
}
Also, if you see yourself in need of downcasting object based on a value of a class, you are doing something wrong, as you are trying to home-brew polymorphism. Most of the times it does indicate a design flaw, and should instead be done using built-in C++ polymorphic support - namely, virtual functions.
My class is as follows:
class stats {
public: int strength,
perception,endurance,charisma,inteligence,agility,luck,health,stamina,mana,karma;
};
As far as I know, there shouldn't be anything wrong with it, unless I need to set up a constructor and destructor.
I create my object using the following line:
stats* mainstat=new stats;
And I have the following function to "fill" objects of the said class:
void statfiller(stats* object, int table[]){
object->strength=table[0]; object->perception=table[1];
object->endurance=table[2]; object->charisma=table[3];
object->inteligence=table[4]; object->agility=table[5];
object->luck=table[6]; object->health=table[7];
object->stamina=table[8]; object->mana=table[9];
object->karma=table[10];
}
So, until then, no problem. At least, until the following:
I create a table with the data to fill, then feed it to my fill function.
int tablet[10]; tablet[0]=5; tablet[1]=5; tablet[2]=5; tablet[3]=5;
tablet[4]=5; tablet[5]=5; tablet[6]=5; tablet[7]=50; tablet[8]=50;
tablet[9]=50; tablet[10]=0;
statfiller(mainstat*,tablet);
When I do this, a compiling error comes up, stating the syntax of my function is incorrect.
Why is it so? Do I need to use pointer(*) or address(&)? Is there something I'm missing?
Odds are, the solution is very simple, but at the moment of typing this, I just don't see what's wrong with it ^^;
Solution to this problem was the following:
The function's syntax is "void statfiller(stats* object, int table[]) ", where the stats* object serves as reference, pointer to an object of stats class.
In the function's call "statfiller(mainstat*,tablet);", the mistake I made was calling a pointer of a stat object (in this case mainstat) instead of just putting in the object.
I'm not going to get into too much of the details on the Excel side of things, I essentially took code from this example:
C++ app automates Excel (CppAutomateExcel)
solution1.cpp
So I've tried this code in MSVC and it compiles:
class foo { public: virtual void bar(){} };
int main()
{
void (foo::*p)() = &foo::bar;
}
But similar code to capture the address of the move function in Excel does not work:
int main()
{
Excel::_ApplicationPtr spXlApp;
HRESULT hr = spXlApp.CreateInstance(__uuidof(Excel::Application));
Excel::WorkbooksPtr spXlBooks = spXlApp->Workbooks;
Excel::_WorkbookPtr spXlBook = spXlBooks->Add();
Excel::_WorksheetPtr spXlSheet = spXlBook->ActiveSheet;
HRESULT(Excel::_Worksheet::*pMove)(...) = &spXlSheet->Excel::_Worksheet::Move;
<... irrelevant code ...>
return 0;
}
This has the following compiler error:
error C2276: '&': illegal operation on bound member function expression
If I remove the &, it says I should add it back:
error C3867: 'Excel::_Worksheet::Move': non-standard syntax; use '&' to create a pointer to member
Any help on what to do here would be greatly appreciated.
You say in your question "but similar code..." and then you show code in which you do not do the same thing. Try using the same syntax for setting pMove as you used for setting p in your smaller example. Try something like &Excel::_Worksheet::Move; (without the "spXlSheet->").
If you can specify the specific instance of the object for which to call the function pointer at the time that you set the function pointer as you have there, I'm not aware of such a capability. After dropping spXlSheet-> from where you set the variable, use it instead where you want to call the function pointer.
You need to declare the method pointer like this instead:
// or whatever parameter type Move() actually uses...
void (Excel::_Worksheet::*pMove)(tagVARIANT, tagVARIANT) = &Excel::_Worksheet::Move;
Then, to actually call pMove(), you would have to do something like this:
Excel::_WorksheetPtr spXlSheet = ...;
(spXlSheet.Get()->*pMove)(...);
I try to call a class function from another class an I get something absolutely weird
all parameters are treated as references , and i cant see why the compiler threat this as a special case
class AbstractModulation
{
public:
virtual bool isValidMatch(
FOLTerm* toMatch,
std::set<FOLVariable>* toMatchVariables,
FOLTerm* possibleMatch,
unordered_map<FOLVariable, FOLTerm*>* substitution)=0;
...
this line:
abstractModulation->isValidMatch(toMatch, toMatchVariables,(FOLTerm*) variable,substitution)
causes this error (see the & character added to each parameter..wtf?):
AbstractModulation.cpp:105:104: error: no matching function for call to ‘AbstractModulation::isValidMatch(FOLTerm*&, std::vector<FOLVariable>*&, FOLTerm*, std::unordered_map<FOLVariable, FOLTerm*>*&)’
candidate:
AbstractModulation.h:44:7: note: bool AbstractModulation::isValidMatch(FOLTerm*, std::set<FOLVariable>*, FOLTerm*, std::unordered_map<FOLVariable, FOLTerm*>*)
and here are the objjects pointers from the calling class
class IdentifyCandidateMatchingTerm : public FOLVisitor
{
private:
FOLTerm* toMatch;
vector<FOLVariable>* toMatchVariables;
FOLTerm* matchingTerm;
unordered_map<FOLVariable, FOLTerm*>* substitution;
please help me out, this is really weird...
You have defined your function taking std::set<FOLVariable>* variable but you try to call it with std::vector<FOLVariable>*.
error: no matching function for call to
‘AbstractModulation::isValidMatch(FOLTerm*&, std::vector<FOLVariable>*&,
^^^^^^^^^^^
But definition is
virtual bool isValidMatch( FOLTerm* toMatch, std::set<FOLVariable>*
^^^^^^^^
This clearly explains what is going on. Double check how and where you are calling this method.
I am learning C++ and very new at using classes, and I am getting very confused in trying to use them. I am trying to convert my existing code (which used structs) so that it uses classes - so while I know what I am trying to do I don't know if I'm doing it correctly.
I was told that when using functions from the class, I first need to instantiate an object of the class. So what I have tried (a snippet) in my main function is:
int main()// line 1
{
string message_fr_client = "test"; //line2
msgInfo message_processed; //line 3
message_processed.incMsgClass(message_fr_client); //line 4
if (!message_processed.priority_check(qos_levels, message_processed)) //line 5
cout << "failure: priority level out of bounds\n"; //line 6
return 0; //line 7
}
Could you help me clarify if my following assumptions are correct? The compiler is not showing any error and so I don't know if it is error-free, or if there are ones lurking beneath.
At line 4, is the function incMsgClass being performed on the string message_fr_client and returning the resultant (and modified) message_processed?
At line 5, the function priority_check is being performed on the message_processed and returning a boolean?
In my class definition, I have a function getPath that is meant to modify the value of nodePath - is it just a matter of using message_processed.getPath(/*arguments*/)?
I haven't included the body of the functions because I know they work - I would just like to find out how the class functions interact. Please let me know if I can be clearer - just trying to clear up some confusion here.
Here is my class:
#ifndef clientMsgHandling_H
#define clientMsgHandling_H
#include <list>
#include <map>
#include <queue>
class msgInfo
{
public:
msgInfo();
msgInfo(int, int, int, std::string, std::list<int>);
/*classifying message*/
msgInfo incMsgClass(std::string original_msg);
/*message error checks*/
bool priority_check(int syst_priority, msgInfo msg); //check that message is within qos levels
bool route_check(std::map<std::pair<int, int>, int> route_table, msgInfo msg); //check that route exists
void getPath(msgInfo msg, std::map<std::pair<int, int>, int> route_info, int max_hop);
private:
int source_id;
int dest_id;
int priority;
std::string payload;
std::list<int> nodePath;
};
#endif
While it may compile (and even run), there are a few oddities with the code as shown:-
First off, class methods know which object they are operating on - so your priority_check and route_check methods probably don't need msgInfo as a parameter.,
for example, your old non-class function might be like this
bool priority_check(int p, msgInfo msg)
{
return msg.priority < p;
}
But the new one should look like this:
bool msgInfo::priority_check(int p)
{
return priority < p;
}
Also, incMsgClass is a bit odd, as it's a non-static class method that returns a msgInfo object. It's difficult to tell without understanding what it's supposed to do, but it seems possible that this function should actually be a constructor, rather than a regular method.
One other thing is that you're currently passing a msgInfo by value to those methods. So if the method needed to modify the passed msgInfo, it would not have any effect. It's generally better to pass objects by reference or const reference to other methods. So, back to the previous non-method example, it should really be this.
bool priority_check(int p, const msgInfo &msg)
...
But, as I said, you probably don't need the msgInfo parameters anyway.
At line 4, is the function incMsgClass being performed on the string message_fr_client
Yes
and returning the resultant (and modified) message_processed?
Whatever it's returning, you're ignoring the return value. It can modify the object itself, yes, because the function is not const.
At line 5, the function priority_check is being performed on the message_processed and returning a boolean?
Yes
In my class definition, I have a function getPath that is meant to modify the value of nodePath - is it just a matter of using message_processed.getPath(/arguments/)?
If a member function is intended to modify one of the class members, it's just a matter of not marking that function const
Hard to tell without implementation-details, but here we go:
I. You are passing a std::string as value (C++ is call-by-value by default), so you get a copy of the std::string in your method. If you want to work on the object you passed and manipulate it, use a reference on the object, like
msgInfo incMsgClass(std::string& original_msg); // notice the ampersand
then you can change your signature to
void incMsgClass(std::string& original_msg);
as you don't need to return the std::string you passed.
II. Yes, at least according to your signature
III. Can see a node_path only as a member.
For all your questions, see C++-FAQ.
Your basic assumptions are correct.
message_processed.incMsgClass(message_fr_client); //line 4
This line is not correct. The function you call returns msgInfo which is simply dropped. You should assign it to something. But it is not as it is usually done. You should make it a constructor of msgInfo, like
class msgInfo
{
public:
msgInfo(std::string original_msg);
...
}
Then you could call it like this
msgInfo message_processed(message_fr_client);
That line would create a msgInfo that is already properly initialized.
There is another pattern for creating class instances - static creating function. In your case you could mark incMsgClass static and then call it like
msgInfo message_processed = msgInfo.incMsgClass(message_fr_client);
I seriously doubt you need this pattern here, so I'd advise to move to constructor.
As of other functions, I see no problems there. Just note that all member functions not marked as const can modify the object they are called on. So, you don't need to pass this object explicitly. For functions a pointer to the object they are called on is available by name this. Also the functions can access all class variables as if these variables are global for normal (non-member) functions.