I did something to break the functionality in my program, but I can't figure out what. I define a typedef in a class headerfile:
typedef boost::function<void(instr_ptr, std::vector<ResultBase*>) > GenFunction;
And inside that class I have two instances:
GenFunction Gen;
GenFunction Kill
I set them as follows:
void DataFlowSolver::SetGenFunction(GenFunction &func)
{
Gen = func;
}
void DataFlowSolver::SetKillFunction(GenFunction &func)
{
Kill = func;
}
I have another function in a seperate header file:
void GenLiveVar(const instr_ptr instr, std::vector<ResultBase*> &list);
I create an instance of the DataFlowSolver class, and attempt to assign into it as follows:
blockSolver.SetGenFunction(GenLiveVar);
However, the compiler complains:
CFG.cc:617: error: no matching function for call to
'DataFlowSolver::SetGenFunction(void (&)(instr_ptr,
std::vector >&))'
DataFlowSolver.h:21: note: candidates are: void
DataFlowSolver::SetGenFunction(GenFunction&)
But it lets me do this:
GenFunction fun = GenLiveVar;
blockSolver.SetGenFunction(fun);
Anyone have an idea what might be wrong? I know this worked before, but I'm not sure how I managed to break it...
You are passing the boost::function into Set*Function by non-const reference. That prevents temporaries from being used as arguments, and the conversion from a normal function to a boost::function creates a temporary value. You will need to use a const reference for your parameter type for the code to work correctly.
Related
I am trying to use an Arduino library and to use one of it's functions as a parameter in my own function, but I don't know how can I do that.
I tried the code below but I get an error.
Any help will be appreciated.
P.S: I do not have an option to use auto keyword.
using namespace httpsserver;
HTTPServer Http;
typedef void (*Register)(HTTPNode*); // My typedef
Register Node = Http.registerNode;
When I am trying to call Node (...), I get the error below.
Cannot convert 'httpsserver::ResourceResolver::registerNode'
from type 'void (httpsserver::ResourceResolver::)(httpsserver::HTTPNode*)'
to type 'Register {aka void (*)(httpsserver::HTTPNode*)}'
How can I create a function pointer for the type :
'void (httpsserver::ResourceResolver::)(httpsserver::HTTPNode*)'
I want to use it as a parameter in another function:
// My Declaration
void Get(void(*Register)(httpsserver::HTTPNode*), const std::string& path);
// Usage
Get (Http.registerNode(...), ""); // Like so
How can I do that?
A member function pointer is not a function pointer.
typedef void (httpsserver::*Register)(HTTPNode*); // My typedef
Register Node = &httpsserver::registerNode;
usage:
void Get(void(httpsserver::*Register)(httpsserver::HTTPNode*), const std::string& path);
Get (&httpsserver::registerNode, "");
you have to pass the httpsserver::HTTPNode* into Register within Get.
If you want to bind the arguments to the function object and call it later, you want std::function<void()>:
void Get(std::function<void()>, const std::string& path);
Get ([&]{ Http.registerNode(...); }, "");
note, however, that this makes lifetime of the objects refered to within the {} above quite dangerous.
GameObject class .h + .cpp:
typedef std::function<void(GameObject* triggerobject, GameObject* otherobject, TriggerAction action)> PhysicsCallback;
void GameObject::OnTrigger(GameObject* triggerobject, GameObject* otherobject, TriggerAction action)
{
if (m_OnTriggerCallback)
m_OnTriggerCallback(triggerobject, otherobject, action);
}
void GameObject::SetOnTriggerCallBack(PhysicsCallback callback)
{
m_OnTriggerCallback = callback;
}
Other class:
m_pSphere->SetOnTriggerCallBack(*pCbObj);
m_pSphere->OnTrigger(m_pWallLeft, m_pSphere, GameObject::TriggerAction(0));
I figured to use the OnTrigger() function I had to set m_OnTriggerCallback. When I tried to pass corresponding arguments however I got really stuck. It seems almost impossible to initalize PhysicsCallback without getting compiler errors.
I tried:
std::function<void(GameObject* triggerobject, GameObject* otherobject, GameObject::TriggerAction action)> *obj;
*obj = (m_pWallRight, m_pSphere, GameObject::TriggerAction(0));
But no luck. *obj doesn't accept any arguments. These following lines give the same errors:
GameObject::PhysicsCallback *pCbObj; = new GameObject::PhysicsCallback(new std::function<void()>()); //term does not evaluate to a function taking 3 arguments
GameObject::PhysicsCallback *pCbObj = new GameObject::PhysicsCallback((m_pWallRight, m_pSphere, GameObject::TriggerAction(0)));
And this line *pCbObj = GameObject::PhysicsCallback(m_pWallRight, m_pSphere, GameObject::TriggerAction(0));gives this intellisense error:
http://puu.sh/gi29n/95f0f7855b.png
I'm really confused, how to use the SetOnTriggerCallBack function?
Doing
m_pSphere->OnTrigger(m_pWallLeft, m_pSphere, GameObject::TriggerAction(0));
is actually calling GameObject::TriggerAction with 0 as argument. Then, it passes its result.
What is GameObject::TriggerAction? Is it a static method ? It should be because, otherwise, you have either to std::bind it to an object instance or to apply it directly.
With a lambda I was able to create an parameter that was acceptable for the compiler:
GameObject::PhysicsCallback trigger = [=](GameObject* triggerobject, GameObject* otherobject, GameObject::TriggerAction action){};
Say that you define a callback function as such:
typedef std::function<void(float)> Callback;
And you have a function as such:
void ImAFunction(float a)
{
//Do something with a
}
Is there a way to be able to store a function without an argument then pass one to it at a later time?
Such as this:
//Define the Callback storage
Callback storage;
storage = std::bind(ImAFunction, this);
//Do some things
storage(5);
This wont work which I explain with some of my real code below.
I can get close to what I wan't if I bind the value in with the std::bind function. Such as:
//Change
//storage = std::bind(ImAFunction, this);
storage = std::bind(ImAFunction, this, 5.0); //5.0 is a float passed
This works but when I go to pass a value through the function the outcome is whatever I set it to before:
storage(100); //Output is still 5
I am basing the fact that I think this is possible on this article.
http://www.cprogramming.com/tutorial/function-pointers.html
It doesn't use the function or bind functions but it does pass pointer arguments and performs exactly what I need. The reason I don't just skip the bind function is because I am trying to store the function in a class (private) and I can't store it if it's a template because it's created with the class.
The error produced above comes from this code:
struct BindInfo {
Callback keyCallback;
int bindType;
bool isDown;
bool held;
std::string name;
};
template <class T1>
void bindEvent(int bindType, T1* keydownObj, void(T1::*keydownF)(float), std::string name)
{
BindInfo newKeyInfo = { std::bind(keydownF, keydownObj), bindType, false, false, name };
inputBindings.insert(std::pair<int, BindInfo>(BIND_NULL, newKeyInfo));
};
The error is:
No viable conversion from '__bind<void(Main::*&)(float), Main *&>' to 'Callback' (aka 'function<void (float)>'
Is this possible? Thanks in advance.
You can include a placeholder for an unbound argument:
std::bind(&Main::ImAFunction, this, std::placeholders::_1);
If you find that a bit of a mouthful, a lambda might be more readable:
[this](float a){ImAFunction(a);}
It sounds like what you're looking for is a function pointer. While I don't have a lot of experience using them in C++ I have used them in C so: Yes, it is possible. Perhaps something like this:
void (*IAmAFunctionPointer)(float) = &IAmAFunction;
The best way to think about that line is, that IAmAFunctionPointer is a pointer (hence the *), it returns a void, and takes a float. Then later:
float a = 5;
IAmAFunctionPointer(a);
You could even design it so that the callback function is passed into the method (I assume this is what you're looking for).
void DoStuffThenCallback(float a, void (*callback)(float))
{
//DoStuff
callback(a);
}
further reading: http://www.cprogramming.com/tutorial/function-pointers.html
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.
I can't figure out whats wrong with the code here, so I was hopinh someone could help me out:
In a header file, I define the following functions
void GenLiveVar(const instr_ptr instr, std::vector<ResultBase*> &list);
void KillLiveVar(const instr_ptr instr, std::vector<ResultBase*> &list);
In a class header file, I define this typedef:
typedef boost::function<void(instr_ptr, std::vector<ResultBase*>) > GenFunction;
inside the class, I have two instances of GenFunction
GenFunction Gen;
GenFunction Kill;
And I assign into them as follows
void DataFlowSolver::SetGenFunction(GenFunction &func)
{
Gen = func;
}
void DataFlowSolver::SetKillFunction(GenFunction &func)
{
Kill = func;
}
later in my program, I assign to gen as follows:
blockSolver.SetGenFunction(GenLiveVar);
where GenLiveVar is the function mentioned earlier and blockSolver is an instance of the class holding the Gen/Kill. Inside blockSolver, I do the following:
std::vector<ResultBase*> genList;
Gen(currentBlock->GetInstrPtr(i), &genList);
and GetInstrPtr is defined as const instr_ptr GetInstrPtr(int index);
It generates the follwoing error (sorry for length)
no match for call to '(GenFunction) (const instr_ptr, std::vector<ResultBase*, std::allocator<ResultBase*> >*)'
/nfs/ug/homes-2/r/rileyjon/ece540/Final/boost/function/function_template.hpp:1007:
note: candidates are: typename boost::function2<R, T1, T2>::result_type boost::function2<R, T1, T2>::operator()(T0, T1) const [with R = void, T0 = boost::shared_ptr<Instruction>,
T1 = std::vector<ResultBase*, std::allocator<ResultBase*> >
]
I dont really understand why this is a problem: the types are definitely the same. Some help would be appreciated. Thanks
The types are definitely not the same.
The argument you are passing is of type std::vector<ResultBase*>* (a pointer):
Gen(currentBlock->GetInstrPtr(i), &genList);
^
The corresponding parameter is of type std::vector<ResultBase*> (a value):
boost::function<void(instr_ptr, std::vector<ResultBase*>)>
^
Also note the mismatch in parameter types between the boost::function, which takes the second argument by value, and the two functions you assign to it, which take their second arguments by reference. This probably won't give you the behavior you expect.