Implementation of Deque in C++ - c++

I'm writing an implementation of Deque as a programming exercise and it's not going too well at all. I'm missing a few key function that are needed to make the test main program I was given function correctly.
Here is my code so far:
#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
#include <cassert>
using namespace std;
template <class T> class DequeIterator;
template <class T>
class Deque {
public:
typedef DequeIterator<T> iterator;
Deque(): vecOne(), vecTwo() { }
Deque(unsigned int size, T& initial): vecOne(size/2, initial), vecTwo(size-(size/2), initial) { }
Deque(Deque<T> & d): vecOne(d.vecOne), vecTwo(d.vecTwo) { }
T & operator[](unsigned int);
T & front();//
T & back();//
bool empty(){ return vecOne.empty() && vecTwo.empty(); }
iterator begin() { return iterator(this,0); }
iterator end() { return iterator(this, size ()); }
void erase(const iterator &);
void erase(const iterator &, const iterator &);
void insert(const iterator &, const T &);
int size() { return vecOne.size() + vecTwo.size(); }
void push_front(const T & value) { vecOne.push_back(value); }
void push_back(const T & value) {vecTwo.push_back(value); }
void pop_front();
void pop_back();
protected:
vector<T> vecOne;
vector<T> vecTwo;
};
template <class T>//
T & Deque<T>::front()//returns the first element in the deque
{
if (vecOne.empty())
return vecTwo.front();
else
return vecOne.back();
}
template <class T>//
T & Deque<T>::back()//returns the last element in the deque
{
if (vecOne.empty())
return vecTwo.back();
else
return vecOne.front();
}
template <class T>//
T & Deque<T>::operator[] (unsigned int index)
{
int n = vecOne.size();
if (index < n)
return vecOne [ (n-1) - index ];
else
return vecTwo [ index - n ];
}
template <class T>//
Deque<T>::iterator DequeIterator<T>::operator ++ (int)
{
Deque<T>::iterator clone(theDeque, index);
index++;
return clone;
}
template <class T>//
void Deque<T>::pop_front()
{
}
template <class T>//
void Deque<T>::pop_back()
{
}
template <class T>//
void Deque<T>::erase (const iterator & itr)
{
int index = itr.index;
int n = vecOne.size();
if (index < n)
vecOne.erase (vecOne.begin() + ((n-1) - index));
else
vecTwo.erase (vecTwo.begin() + (n - index));
}
template <class T>//
void Deque<T>::erase (const iterator &, const iterator &)
{
}
template <class T>//
void Deque<T>::insert(const iterator &, const T &)
{
}
template <class T>
class DequeIterator {
friend class Deque<T>;
typedef DequeIterator<T> iterator;
public:
DequeIterator(): theDeque(0), index(0) { }
DequeIterator(Deque<T> * d, int i): theDeque(d), index(i) { }
DequeIterator(const iterator & d): theDeque(d.theDeque), index(d.index) { }
T & operator*() { return (*theDeque)[index]; }
iterator & operator++(int) { ++index; return *this; }
iterator operator++();
iterator operator--(int) { --index; return *this; }
iterator & operator--();
bool operator==(const iterator & r) { return theDeque == r.theDeque && index == r.index; }
bool operator!=(const iterator & r) { return theDeque == r.theDeque && index != r.index; }
bool operator< (const iterator & r) { return theDeque == r.theDeque && index < r.index; }
T & operator[](unsigned int i) { return (*theDeque) [index + i]; }
iterator operator=(const iterator & r) { theDeque = r.theDeque; index = r.index; }
iterator operator+(int i) { return iterator(theDeque, index + i); }
iterator operator-(int i) { return iterator(theDeque, index - i); }
protected:
Deque<T> * theDeque;
int index;
};
main()
{
Deque<int> d;
d.push_back(10);
d.push_back(20);
assert(d.front() == 10);
assert(d.back() == 20);
d.push_front(1);
d.push_front(2);
d.push_front(3);
assert(d.front() == 3);
assert(d.back() == 20);
d.pop_back();
d.pop_back();
d.pop_back();
assert(d.front() == 3);
assert(d.back() == 2);
d.push_back(1);
d.push_back(0);
Deque<int>::iterator i;
int counter = 3;
for (i = d.begin(); i != d.end(); i++)
assert(*i == counter--);
for (counter = 0; counter < d.size(); counter++)
assert(d[counter] == d.size()-counter-1);
i = d.begin() + 3;
Deque<int>::iterator j(i), k;
k = j = i - 2;
assert(*k == 2);
for (i = d.begin(); not(i == d.end()); ++i)
cout << *i << " ";
cout << endl;
d.erase(d.begin()+3);
//d.erase(d.begin(), d.begin()+2);
assert(d.size() == 1);
assert(d[0] == 1);
Deque<int> c(d);
c.front() = 3;
assert(c.back() == 3);
c.push_front(1);
c.insert(c.begin(), 0);
c.insert(c.begin()+2, 2);
for (i = c.begin(); not(i == c.end()); ++i)
cout << *i << " ";
cout << endl;
for (counter = 0; counter < c.size(); counter++)
assert(c[counter] == counter);
cout << "SUCCESS\n";
}
I was wondering if someone could tell me my function from line 66 is returning:
expected constructor, destructor, or type conversion before 'DequeIterator'
Because I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong in it. Also, if someone would be kind enough to give me an example of the pop_front() function so that I can use it to create the pop_back() function as well, that would be great. Lastly, I have on of the erase functions completed but I am not sure how to go about creating the second one, which basically erases a value within the range of two iterators, it is referenced in line 176.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

As for the error, you probably need a typename before Deque<T>::iterator on that line.
typename Deque<T>::iterator DequeIterator<T>::operator++(int)

I think it is a great programming exercise to implement deque. But a prerequisite is to implement vector and list. deque is one of the most complicated std::containers to implement. You should start with one of the simpler ones (vector and list).

Well, you get the error on line 65 because you return an object of a class that hasn't been defined. You only have the forward declaration (prototype) for class DequeIterator, not the implementation.

void pop_back() {
vecTwo.pop_back();
}
void pop_front() {
vecOne.pop_back();
}

Related

How do I modify push_back to store unique vectors

I'm very very new to vectors and templates. Can't seem to wrap my head around them just yet.
The code is as follows:
template <class T>
class m_vector
{
int m_iNextIndex;
int m_iMaxSize;
T* m_pArray;
public:
m_vector()
{
m_pArray = 0;
init();
}
m_vector(const m_vector<T>& other)
{
m_pArray = 0;
m_iNextIndex = 0;
m_iMaxSize = 0;
*this = other;
}
~m_vector()
{
if (m_pArray != 0)
delete [] m_pArray;
}
void init()
{
m_iMaxSize = VECT_INC_SIZE;
m_pArray = new T[m_iMaxSize];
m_iNextIndex = 0;
}
inline void push_back(const T& item)
{
if (m_iNextIndex >= m_iMaxSize)
{
resize(m_iNextIndex + VECT_INC_SIZE);
m_iNextIndex -= VECT_INC_SIZE;
}
m_pArray[m_iNextIndex] = item;
++m_iNextIndex;
}
void resize(int iNewSize)
{
if (iNewSize >= m_iMaxSize)
{
T* temp = new T[iNewSize];
for (int i = 0; i < m_iNextIndex; ++i)
{
temp[i] = m_pArray[i];
}
delete [] m_pArray;
m_pArray = temp;
m_iMaxSize = iNewSize;
}
m_iNextIndex = iNewSize;
}
};
The push_back is called with Vectors that are (x, y) and rectangles that are (x, y, width, height).
I thought that since the code had "m_pArray[m_iNextIndex] = item" that I could simply add a new function to check that the item is unique before adding it to the vector list. So I coded a routine as follows:
int inline exists(const &item)
{
for(int i = 0; i < m_iMaxSize; i++)
{
if(m_pArray[i] == item)
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
The compiler was non to happy. It reported the following error on the if statement:
“left operand must be a pointer or pointer to class member, or arithmetic”
I'm thinking that I probably need something like:
if (type == vector)
if( (m_pArray[i].x == item.x) ....)
else
if( (m_pArray[i].x == item.x) && (m_pArray[i].width == item.width) )
Am I on the right track?
If so, how do I check the type of item.
Thx, Bill.
The problem is that your Vector or Rectangle are missing a comparison operator e.g.
friend bool operator== (Vector const& lhs, Vector const& rhs){
return lhs.x == rhs.x && lhs.y == rhs.y;
}
But the rest of you code is not good and needs a rewrite. I've rewritten my code to old-old style:
NOTE: DON'T BLINDLY COPY THIS CODE. ITS JUST FOR REFERENCE. TEST BEFORE YOU USE
#define VECT_INC_SIZE 10
// replaced by iterator version
//template< class InputIt, class Size, class OutputIt>
//OutputIt copy_n(InputIt first, Size count, OutputIt result) {
// while (count-- > 0) {
// *result++ = *first++;
// }
// return result;
//}
template<class InputIt, class OutputIt>
OutputIt copy(InputIt first, InputIt last, OutputIt d_first) {
while (first != last) {
*d_first++ = *first++;
}
return d_first;
}
template<class T>
T exchange(T& obj, T new_value)
{
T old_value = obj;
obj = new_value;
return old_value;
}
template <class T>
class m_vector
{
private:
unsigned int size;
unsigned int capacity;
T* array;
public:
m_vector()
: size(0)
, capacity(VECT_INC_SIZE)
, array(new T[VECT_INC_SIZE])
{}
m_vector(m_vector<T> const& other)
: size(other.size)
, capacity(other.capacity)
, array(new T[other.capacity]) {
//copy_n(other.array, size, array);
copy(other.cbegin(), other.cend(), begin());
}
// rule of 3
m_vector& operator=(m_vector<T> const& other) {
if (&other != this) {
if (other.capacity != capacity){
delete [] exchange(array, new T[other.capacity]);
capacity = other.capacity;
}
size = other.size;
//copy_n(other.array, size, array);
copy(other.cbegin(), other.cend(), begin());
}
return *this;
}
~m_vector() {
if (array != 0) delete [] array;
}
void push_back(T const& item) {
if (size >= capacity) {
reserve(capacity + VECT_INC_SIZE);
}
array[size] = item;
++size;
}
void reserve(unsigned int newCapacity) {
if (size > capacity) {
T* const temp = new T[newCapacity];
//copy_n(array, size, temp);
copy(cbegin(), cend(), temp);
delete [] exchange(array, temp);
capacity = newCapacity;
}
}
bool exists(T const& item) const {
//for(unsigned int i = 0; i < size; ++i) {
// if(array[i] == item) return true;
//}
for(T const* it = cbegin(); it != cend(); ++it) {
if(*it == item) return true;
}
return false;
}
void erase(T const& item) {
T* it = begin();
T* const endIt = end();
while(it != endIt && *it != item) ++it;
if (it == endIt) return;
copy(it + 1, endIt, it);
--size;
}
// iterators
T* begin() { return array; }
T* end() { return array + size; }
T const* cbegin() const { return array; }
T const* cend() const { return array + size; }
};
class Vector {
private:
int x,y;
public:
Vector() : x(0), y(0) {}
Vector(int x, int y) : x(x), y(y) {}
friend bool operator== (Vector const& lhs, Vector const& rhs){
return lhs.x == rhs.x && lhs.y == rhs.y;
}
friend bool operator!= (Vector const& lhs, Vector const& rhs){
return !(lhs==rhs);
}
};
#include <cstdio>
void VectorInM_Vector(m_vector<Vector> const& vec, Vector const& item) {
if (vec.exists(item)) printf("Vector found in vector\n");
else printf("Vector not found in vector\n");
}
int main(){
m_vector<Vector> vec;
vec.push_back(Vector(1,1));
VectorInM_Vector(vec, Vector(1,1));
m_vector<Vector> vec2(vec);
vec.erase(Vector(1,1));
VectorInM_Vector(vec, Vector(1,1));
VectorInM_Vector(vec2, Vector(1,1));
vec2 = vec;
VectorInM_Vector(vec2, Vector(1,1));
}
on compiler explorer/godbolt

Abstraction for bitset element iteration

I have a custom bitset class implementation in C++. I often iterate over the indexes of bits that are set in the bitset (i.e. for bitset '10011' I want to iterate over numbers 0, 3, 4.) This iteration can be implemented as follows:
struct Bitset {
uint64_t* data_;
size_t chunks_;
std::vector<int> Elements() const {
std::vector<int> ret;
for (size_t i=0;i<chunks_;i++){
uint64_t td = data_[i];
while (td) {
ret.push_back(i*BITS + __builtin_ctzll(td));
td &= ~-td;
}
}
return ret;
}
};
void Iterate(Bitset bitset) {
for (int b : bitset.Elements()) {
std::cout << "bit: " << b << std::endl;
}
}
The above implementation provides clean code for the iteration, but it involves an unnecessary heap allocation with the vector. The following version which essentially inlines the Elements() function is often faster:
void Iterate(Bitset bitset) {
int chunks = bitset.chunks_;
for (int i = 0; i < chunks; i++) {
uint64_t td = bitset.data_[i];
while (td) {
std::cout << "bit: " << i*BITS + __builtin_ctzll(td) << std::endl;
td &= ~-td;
}
}
}
What would be a good way to implement an abstraction for the iteration so that it would be as clean as the above version, but also with no performance cost.
Just iterate over your class. Provide your own implementation of an iterator class for your Bitset and provide begin() and end() methods. A simplest (untested!) implementation could look something like this:
#include <vector>
#include <cstdint>
#include <iostream>
struct Bitset {
uint64_t* data_;
size_t chunks_;
struct iterator {
uint64_t *pnt;
uint_fast8_t pos;
iterator(uint64_t *pnt, size_t pos) :
pnt(pnt), pos(pos) {}
bool operator !=(const iterator& o) {
return o.pnt != pnt || o.pos != pos;
}
void operator ++() {
pos++;
if (pos == 64) {
pnt++;
pos = 0;
}
}
bool operator *() {
return *pnt & (1 << pos);
}
};
iterator begin() { return iterator(data_, 0); }
iterator end() { return iterator(data_ + chunks_, 64); }
};
void Iterate(Bitset bitset) {
for (auto&& b : bitset) {
std::cout << "bit: " << b << std::endl;
}
}
I believe for your strange while (td) { ... i*BITS + __builtin_ctzll(td) ... loop that I don't understand that could be something along (untested!):
constexpr int BITS = 100000;
struct Bitset {
uint64_t* data_;
size_t chunks_;
struct iterator {
uint64_t *data_;
int i = 0;
uint64_t td = 0;
iterator(uint64_t *data_, int i, uint64_t td) :
data_(data_), i(i), td(td) {}
bool operator !=(const iterator& o) {
return o.data_ != data_ || o.i != i || o.td != td;
}
void operator ++() {
if (td == 0) {
td = *data_;
data_++;
} else {
td &= ~-td;
}
}
bool operator *() {
return i * BITS + __builtin_ctzll(td);
}
};
iterator begin() { return iterator(data_, 0, *data_); }
iterator end() { return iterator(data_ + chunks_, 0, 0); }
};
As KamilCuk suggested, I used an iterator to solve this problem. Now the implementation looks like:
struct Bitset {
uint64_t* data_;
size_t chunks_;
class BitsetIterator {
private:
const Bitset* const bitset_;
size_t pos_;
uint64_t tb_;
public:
BitsetIterator(const Bitset* const bitset, size_t pos, uint64_t tb) :
bitset_(bitset), pos_(pos), tb_(tb) { }
bool operator!=(const BitsetIterator& other) const {
return pos_ != other.pos_ || tb_ != other.tb_;
}
const BitsetIterator& operator++() {
tb_ &= ~-tb_;
while (tb_ == 0 && pos_ < bitset_->chunks_) {
pos_++;
if (pos_ < bitset_->chunks_) {
tb_ = bitset_->data_[pos_];
}
}
return *this;
}
int operator*() const {
return pos_*BITS + __builtin_ctzll(tb_);
}
};
BitsetIterator begin() const {
size_t pos = 0;
while (pos < chunks_ && data_[pos] == 0) {
pos++;
}
if (pos < chunks_) {
return BitsetIterator(this, pos, data_[pos]);
} else {
return BitsetIterator(this, pos, 0);
}
}
BitsetIterator end() const {
return BitsetIterator(this, chunks_, 0);
}
};
void Iterate(Bitset bitset) {
for (int b : bitset) {
std::cout << "bit: " << b << std::endl;
}
}
This avoids heap allocation and is much faster than the version that uses vector. I'm not sure if this provides exactly same performance as the version without any abstractions, but it should be very close.

Class Iterator inside of container class

I need to build an inner class iterator to work with a container class FigureOfCircles
#define T Circle
class FigureOfCircles {
private:
Circle* c;
int size;
public:
class Iterator {
protected:
T* t;
public:
explicit Iterator (T* t1 = 0) : t(t1) { }
Iterator (const Iterator& x) : t(x.t) {}
T& operator*() const { return *t; }
T* operator->() const { return t; }
Circle& operator[](const std::size_t& n) { return t[n]; }
Iterator& operator++() { ++t; return *this; }
Iterator operator++(int) { return Iterator(t++); }
Iterator& operator--() { --t; return *this; }
Iterator operator--(int) { return Iterator(t--); }
Iterator operator- (int n) { return Iterator(t - n); }
Iterator operator+ (int n) { return Iterator(t - n); }
Iterator& operator-= (int n) { t -= n; return *this; }
Iterator& operator+= (int n) { t += n; return *this; }
bool operator== (const Iterator& x) const { return t == x.t; }
bool operator!= (const Iterator& x) const { return t != x.t; }
bool operator<= (const Iterator& x) const { return t <= x.t; }
bool operator> (const Iterator& x) const { return t > x.t; }
bool operator>= (const Iterator& x) const { return t >= x.t; }
bool operator< (const Iterator& x) const { return t < x.t; }
friend int operator- (const Iterator& x, const Iterator& y) { return x.t - y.t; }
Iterator& operator= (const Iterator& x) {
if (t == x.t) exit(-6);
t = x.t;
return *this;
}
};
FigureOfCircles (int sz) : size(sz) {
c = new T[size];
for (Iterator i = begin(); i != end(); ++i) *i = input();
}
FigureOfCircles(const FigureOfCircles& f) {
size = f.size;
c = new T[size];
for (Iterator i = begin(); i != end(); ++i) *i = f.c[i - begin()];
}
~FigureOfCircles() { if (c) delete[] c; }
Circle input() {
int size = 1;
Point* arr = new Point[size];
float r, x1, y1;
cout << endl << "Введiть к-сть точок, радiус i координати центру: ";
cin >> size >> r >> x1 >> y1;
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++) {
Point tmp;
cin >> tmp;
if (tmp.GetX() == x1 && tmp.GetY() == y1) exit(-7);
if (pow(tmp.GetX() - x1, 2) + pow(tmp.GetY() - y1, 2) != r * r) exit(-8);
arr[i] = tmp;
}
return Circle(size, r, arr, x1, y1);
}
Iterator begin() { return Iterator(c); }
Iterator end() { return Iterator(c+size); }
};
But I don’t understand what type should T be so that I can use the iterator object? If it is int, then what about
Iterator begin() { return Iterator(c); }
Iterator end() { return Iterator(c+size); }
Note:
FigureOfCircles (int sz) : size(sz) {
c = new T[size];
for (int i = 0; i < size; i++)
c[i].input();
for (Iterator i = begin(); i != end(); ++i) {
*i = T(i-begin());
}
}
...
int main () {
//...
FigureOfCircles f(2);
FigureOfCircles::Iterator i;
for (i = f.begin(); i != f.end(); i++) cout << *i << endl;
}
You have an array of Circles, pointed by c. An iterator should point to elements of this array. The simplest solution is to use a plain pointer. That is, T in your iterator should be just Circle.
If you want to use int (it should be std::ptrdiff_t), your iterator should also keep a pointer to the first element. In this particular example I don't see a reason to do it.
operator- should return the difference between pointers, std::ptrdiff_t, not Circle:
friend std::ptrdiff_t operator-(Iterator x, Iterator y) {
return x.t - y.t;
}
Take Iterator by value. It's just a single pointer, you don't need to take it by const-ref (effectively taking a pointer to a pointer).
Once you have iterators, you can use the standard library algorithms to make copies: instead of
for (Iterator i = begin(); i != end(); ++i) *i = f.c[i - begin()];
you can write
std::copy(f.begin(), f.end(), begin());
I suggest you use std::vector<Circle> instead of Circle*. Then you'll be able to borrow its iterators:
class FigureOfCircles {
private:
std::vector<Circle> c;
public:
std::vector<Circle>::iterator begin() {
c.begin();
}
std::vector<Circle>::iterator end() {
c.end();
}
};
This will also save you from writing a copy constructor and destructor.
While #Evg's answer is valid, it is not clear from your question why would even need to write your own iterator. If, instead of a pair of pointer+length members, you would use an std::vector or std::array - or even std::span which is oblivious to where you get your buffer from - you could use these classes' respective iterators instead of implementing your own.
It is only if you have some special behavior in your FigureOfCircles class - e.g. element skipping, non-standard iteration order and so on - that you really need a custom iterator.
PS - The naming is a bit awkward. If a Figure can only have Circles, then just call the class Figure. If there are Figures of something other than Circles, try: template <typename Element> class Figure { ... } and then you'll use Figure<Circle>.

How to prevent infinite loop of custom iterator

I implemented my first custom iterator, which is supposed to return an std::pair at each iteration. The only problem, is it loops infinitely and I do not know how to provide stop condition. The code looks like so:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <utility>
class Simple
{
private:
std::vector<std::size_t> indices;
std::vector<int> values;
public:
void insert(std::size_t index, int value)
{
indices.push_back(index);
values.push_back(value);
}
int at(std::size_t index)
{
return values[indices[index]];
}
class Iterator
{
private:
const std::vector<std::size_t>* indices;
const std::vector<int>* values;
std::size_t pos = 0;
public:
Iterator(const std::vector<std::size_t>* indices_, const std::vector<int>* values_, const std::size_t &pos_ = 0):
values(values_), indices(indices_), pos(pos_){ }
bool operator==(const Iterator& other){
return this == &other;
}
bool operator!=(const Iterator& other){
return !operator==(other);
}
Iterator operator++() {
pos++;
Iterator i = *this;
return i;
}
std::pair<std::size_t, int> operator*()
{
if (pos < (*values).size())
{
return std::make_pair((*indices)[pos], (*values)[pos]);
}
std::cout << "EMPTY PAIR" << std::endl; //loops infinitely and prints this message
return std::pair<std::size_t,int>{};
}
std::pair<std::size_t, int>* operator->()
{
if (pos < (*values).size())
{
std::pair<std::size_t,int> *p;
*p = std::make_pair((*indices)[pos], (*values)[pos]);
return p;
}
return nullptr;
}
};
Iterator begin() const
{
return Iterator(&indices, &values, 0);
}
Iterator end() const
{
return Iterator(&indices, &values, values.size());
}
};
int main() {
Simple s;
s.insert(10, 100);
std::cout << s.at(10) << std::endl;
int i = 0;
for (const std::pair<std::size_t, int> &p : s)
{
std::cout << p.first << " " << p.second << std::endl;
if (i > 3) break; // otherwise it will loop infinitely
i++;
}
return 0;
}
I would like to stress, that this example is simplified and for demonstration purposes, so you may not ask me, why I'm not using map or unorded_map (just because what I'm implementing looks like a map). The question is solely about iterator and I need understanding what may be wrong with iterator itself and how to provide stop condition.

vector std::out_of_range in my own template class(vector of pointers to list Nodes), but I can't see why

I am writing codes for a template class with linked list and vectors of pointers to some nodes in the linked list. The code is ugly because I just wrote what I thought might work, and corrected it focusing on fixing the error messages.
The list (accordingly, the vector, too) is kept sorted because it finds the right position with position method every time it insert an item.
Initially, I had a lot of errors, and I was able to fix them after a lot of trying.
Now it compiles, but when I tested it with a main method if this template class works fine, it throws an error message:
terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::out_of_range'
what(): vector::_M_range_check
Aborted (core dumped)
I know what std::out_of_range is, but I really do not see why this error occurs.
There is not even many parts in my code that accesses elements of the vector.
The following is the code for the testing main method, and the next is the definition for my template class(and the nested iterator class).
#include <iostream>
#include <fstream>
#include <cstdlib>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
#include "ValliHN.h"
using namespace std;
int main() {
Valli<string> valli;
valli.insert("K");
valli.insert("H");
valli.insert("N");
valli.insert("H");
valli.insert("J");
for (Valli<string>::iterator i = valli.begin(); i != valli.end(); i++)
cout << *i << endl;
return 0;
}
The template class
#include"DList.h"
#include<iostream>
#include<vector>
#include<algorithm>
#include<cstdlib>
using std::cout;
using std::endl;
using std::cerr;
using std::vector;
template<typename I>
class Valli {
vector< DNode<I>* > va;
DList<I> lli;
size_t ratio;
friend class iterator;
friend class DList<I>;
public:
class iterator {
typename DList<I>::iterator list_iter;
iterator(DNode<I>* node)
: list_iter(typename DList<I>::iterator(node)) { }
friend class Valli<I>;
friend class DList<I>;
public:
I& operator*() const {
return *list_iter;
}
iterator& operator++() {
++list_iter;
return *this;
}
iterator operator++(int) {
iterator* ret = this;
++list_iter;
return *ret;
}
iterator& operator--() {
--list_iter;
return *this;
}
iterator operator--(int) {
typename DList<I>::iterator ret = list_iter;
--list_iter;
return ret;
}
bool operator==(const iterator& rhs) const {
return list_iter == rhs.list_iter;
}
bool operator!=(const iterator& rhs) const {
return list_iter != rhs.list_iter;
}
DNode<I>* returnCurr() const {
return list_iter.returnCurr();
}
};
explicit Valli<I>(size_t ratio=4)
: ratio(ratio),
lli(DList<I>()),
va(vector< DNode<I>* >()) { }
// Valli<I>()
// : Valli<I>(4) { }
~Valli<I>() {
// delete[] va;
// delete lli;
}
iterator insert(const I& item) {
iterator pos = position(va, item);
lli.insert(pos.returnCurr(), item);
refresh(4);
return --pos;
}
iterator find(const I& item) const {
iterator start = iterator(va.at(binsearch(va, item)));
iterator end = iterator(va.at(binsearch(va, item)+1));
while(start != end) {
if(*start = item) {
return start;
}
else {
++start;
}
}
}
// void erase(iterator itr) {}
iterator begin() const {
lli.begin();
}
iterator end() const {
lli.end();
}
private:
int binsearch(const vector< DNode<I>* > vec, const I& item) const {
int left = 0;
int right = vec.size()-1;
while(left <= right) {
int mid = (left+right)/2;
iterator iter = iterator(vec.at(mid));
if(item < *iter) {
right = mid-1;
}
else if(item == *iter) {
return mid;
}
else {
left = mid+1;
}
}
return left;
}
iterator position(const vector< DNode<I>* > vec, const I& item) const {
iterator start = iterator(vec.at(binsearch(vec, item)));
iterator end = iterator(vec.at(binsearch(vec, item)+1));
while(start != end) {
if(*start < item) {
++start;
}
else {
return start;
}
}
}
void refresh(size_t newRatio) {
iterator iter = begin();
int count = 0;
va.clear();
while(iter!=end()) {
if(count % newRatio == 0) {
va.push_back(iter.returnCurr());
}
//push_backing the last node - to be added
iter++;
count++;
}
}
};
The class DList.h is very similar to the standard library list class.
Can you see the problem in my code?
Also, could you tell me if my code overall looks good or bad, in terms of both good programming practices and the implementation of the coding direction?
Thank you very much!
Look to me like you have a vector out of range on the first insert. insert calls position, which calls binsearch. binsearch returns 0 because the vector is empty, position then calls vector.at(0) (and vector.at(1)). Both of those are out of range errors because the vector is empty.
I'm just staring at the code so I might have made a mistake. Really you should use a debugger, and find out exactly where the problem occurs.