Recursively created linked lists with a class, C++ - c++

I'm using C++ to recursively make a hexagonal grid (using a multiply linked list style). I've got it set up to create neighboring tiles easily, but because I'm doing it recursively, I can only really create all 6 neighbors for a given tile. Obviously, this is causing duplicate tiles to be created and I'm trying to get rid of them in some way. Because I'm using a class, checking for null pointers doesn't seem to work. It's either failing to convert from my Tile class to and int, or somehow converting it but not doing it properly. I'm explicitly setting all pointers to NULL upon creation, and when I check to see if it still is, it says it's not even though I never touched it since initialization. Is there a specific way I'm supposed to do this? I can't even traverse the grid without NULLs of some kind
Here's some of my relevant code. Yes, I know it's embarassing.
Tile class header:
class Tile
{
public:
Tile(void);
Tile(char *Filename);
~Tile(void);
void show(void);
bool LoadGLTextures();
void makeDisplayList();
void BindTexture();
void setFilename(char *newName);
char Filename[100];
GLuint texture[2];
GLuint displayList;
Tile *neighbor[6];
float xPos, yPos,zPos;
};`
Tile Initialization:
Tile::Tile(void)
{
xPos=0.0f;
yPos=0.0f;
zPos=0.0f;
glEnable(GL_DEPTH_TEST);
strcpy(Filename, strcpy(Filename, "Data/BlueTile.bmp"));
if(!BuildTexture(Filename, texture[0]))
MessageBox(NULL,"Texture failed to load!","Crap!",MB_OK|MB_ICONASTERISK);
for(int x=0;x<6;x++)
{
neighbor[x]=NULL;
}
}
Creation of neighboring tiles:
void MakeNeighbors(Tile *InputTile, int stacks)
{
for(int x=0;x<6;x++)
{
InputTile->neighbor[x]=new Tile();
InputTile->neighbor[x]->xPos=0.0f;
InputTile->neighbor[x]->yPos=0.0f;
InputTile->zPos=float(stacks);
}
if(stacks)
{
for(int x=0;x<6;x++)
MakeNeighbors(InputTile->neighbor[x],stacks-1);
}
}
And finally, traversing the grid:
void TraverseGrid(Tile *inputTile)
{
Tile *temp;
for(int x=0;x<6;x++)
if(inputTile->neighbor[x])
{
temp=inputTile->neighbor[x];
temp->xPos=0.0f;
TraverseGrid(temp);
//MessageBox(NULL,"Not Null!","SHUTDOWN ERROR",MB_OK | MB_ICONINFORMATION);
}
}
The key line is "if(inputTile->neighbor[x])" and whether I make it "if(inputTile->neighbor[x]==NULL)" or whatever I do, it just isn't handling it properly. Oh and I'm also aware that I haven't set up the list fully. It's only one direction now.

If you want to create a hexagonal grid you should remember that it easily can be simulated using a normal grid!
__ __ __
\__/2 \__/4 \__/6 \
/1 \__/3 \__/5 \__/
\__/8 \__/10\__/12\
/7 \__/9 \__/11\__/
\__/ \__/ \__/ \
This will make life MUCH simpler :)
Hence the easiest way would be
set up a temporary square grid m*n
fill it with tiles
traverse the grid and connect properly
Now the connections, based on the diagram above:
A) Connect to previous and next [x-1,y], [x+1,y]
B) Connect to row above and row below [x,y-1], [x,y+1]
C) Connect to row above previous and next [x-1,y-1], [x+1,y-1]
... and you have all desired connections (just remember to check bounds to decide if the tile isn't on the edge) -- if you hold the tiles in another way, you can even remove the grid :).

I'm only guessing at what MakeNeighbors() does, but instead of blindly doing InputTile->neighbor[x]=new Tile();, you could check to see if neighbor[x] is non-NULL before creating a new one and initializing it. E.g. if its parent creates it and sets all of its neighbor information, then it shouldn't go and create its parent.
When the parent creates the children, it should also define the children's other neighbors appropriately, as far as it knows them. So, it should make sure that child[i] also is neighbors with child[i-1] and child[i+1].

Creation. Recursion is a neat and elegant way to solve some problems, but it isn't perfect for every problem. I suspect that a purely recursive solution to creating the nodes would be much more complicated (i.e. less elegant) than Kornel Kisielewicz's straightforward iterative solution. That's because the Tile constructor needs to know the layout of all tiles in its immediate vicinity, in order to avoid recreating nodes that are already there.
Traversal. The main problem in your node-traversal code is similar in that you will wind up with an infinite loop and blow the stack because every node will eventually "traverse" back to its parent, beginning the cycle again. I presume you're trying to visit every tile exactly once, right? In that case TraverseGrid() needs to have a parameter telling it which direction we are entering the node from, so that we avoid traversing back that way.
But that's not enough -- you also need more discipline in deciding which directions to go. Simply spreading out in all directions except the direction we entered from will still wind up in an infinite loop and stack overflow, since any three adjacent tiles will cycle endlessly. In order to do this recursively you need to really think about which strategies will wind up visiting each node once and only once.
One possibility would be changing the signature of TraverseGrid() to TraverseGrid(Tile *inputTile, int fromDir, bool leftmost) and then using the following rules:
If we entered from above-left, traverse only to above-right, passing leftmost = false.
If we entered from below-left or above-right, traverse only to below-right, passing leftmost = false.
If leftmost, and there is a node to our lower left, then also traverse to that node, passing leftmost = true.
Of course fromDir and leftmost could be combined into a single parameter, but this gives the general idea.
Another alternative would be keeping a visited flag in each tile which is checked before traversing to that tile. Then your traversal will be a flood fill. But again, a simple iterative traversal is likely to be much simpler and easier to understand, and has the additional benefit of using constant stack space.

In the class declaration there is a second constructor Tile(char *Filename);. Maybe this constructor is used to create the main node, but doesn't initialize neighbor properly? (Its implementation isn't shown.)
And on an unrelated node, you have a duplicate strcpy() in the constructor that doesn't serves any purpose and might only lead to problems:
strcpy(Filename, strcpy(Filename, "Data/BlueTile.bmp"));

I actually did the same thing but my pattern was more like this:
00 01 02 03 04
10 11 12 13 14
20 21 22 23 24
30 31 32 33 34
This makes it pretty easy to figure out what can be reached, but forces a strange offset pattern. I just got rid of (in the above example) 00,01,10 and 20 to make it more of a hex pattern like this:
02 03 04 05 06
11 12 13 14 15
21 22 23 24 25
30 31 32 33 34
So if you look at the pattern above, reachable is always the same:
from 23 (call 2 "a" and 3 "b") you can get to:
NW(a-1, b), NE(a-1, b+1), W(a, b-1), E(a, b+1), SW(a+1, b-1), SE(a+1,b)
This pattern should hold correct for the entire grid.
EDIT:
I was going to do this in a comment but it got too long. I can see two approaches.
1) Allocate the array of nodes (null, don't allocate them). Whenever you need to allocate a node, just do so, but use the array address whenever you need to reference a node, if it's null populate it, if it has a value use that value. Huge empty arrays shouldn't take up that much memory, but if they do...
2) Create a HashSet to hold your nodes where the Hash value of the node class is calculated like this: (a << 32 || b). In this way you can instantly look up to see if a previous node existed or not. Remember to overload "equals" as well (it should return true only if the compared object is the same type and a and b are equal).
In a mostly populated system where bounds are known, 1 will save memory, but if your system is sparse (as you claim) then #2 could save a LOT of memory with no cost to efficiency.

Related

Parse Individual Curves from General_polygon_set_2 in CGAL

To start, I want to thank everyone who has helped me so far on previous problems I have had with working through the CGAL Library, it is greatly appreciated.
Background on myself: I am still very new with C++ and my coding experience is in MATLAB so there is a lot of concepts that I am learning very quickly and are therefore very new to me, so please excuse my erroneous language that I may use with regard to C++.
The Problem:
I have recently wrote some code that finds the Minkowski sum of a polyline and a circle (i.e., buffer of a polyline) using the code found in the documentation of Boolean Set Operations on General Polygons.
Here, a General_polygon_set_2 concept is utilized in the output, and if the output code is used from the example above I can get the following output of a Polygon_with_holes_2 class:
48 [775.718 -206.547 --> 769.134 -157.991] (769 -157 1 1) [769.134 -157.991 --> 770 -157] (769 -157 1 1) [770 -157 --> 768.866 -156.009] [768.866 -156.009 --> 762.282 -107.453] [762.282 -107.453 --> 703.282 -115.453] [703.282 -115.453 --> 708.072 -150.778] ...
7 15 [549.239 -193.612 --> 569.403 -216.422] ... 3 [456.756 -657.812 --> 657.930 908.153] ...
Here, if I understand correctly, the first integer refers to the number of a vertices in the .outer_boundary() , followed by descriptions of the curves for each "edge" of the general polygon. In my problem, the outputs will only consist of linear functions and circular arcs.
Linear: [775.718 -206.547 --> 769.134 -157.991]
Circular Arc (x-monotone): (769 -157 1 1) [769.134 -157.991 --> 770 -157]
The linear element is simple, go from this x-y coordinate to this other one by a line. As for the the circular arc, it is little bit more different, it says to use this circle described by the arguments in these brackets () to go from this x-y coordinate to this other one contained in these brackets []. The arguments to circle are: (x,y,radius,orientation).
Next, since we have holes, after the .outer_boundary() has been written out, two more integers are displayed. The first one states the number of holes, the second states the number vertices in this hole, then followed by those vertices for that hole. Then once that hole is written out, another integer is written describing the number of vertices in that hole, and this then continues for all of the holes, completing the description of the polygon.
So with that, my current problem is parsing out each individual curve one at a time so that I can do operations on them.
I have the following functions from the documentation to work with:
.outer_boundary(): returns the general polygon that represents the outer boundary.
.holes_begin(): returns the begin iterator of the holes.
.holes_end():
So my thought is to break the General_polygon_set_2 to General_polygon_2, then break that down into the .outer_boundary() and the different holes. Finally, for each set of curves, break those down into individual curves.
I am not really sure how to go about this, I just know that I need individual curve data so I can do my own operations on them. Any help, will be, as always, greatly appreciated!
Note: I actually deleted this post after reading through the arrangements documentation thinking that this was too obvious of an answer, but after sometime I still really do not see how to pull this info properly, I think the biggest issue is in my lacking knowledge of C++. Sorry about this being a noob-ish question.
Solution in Progress:
list<Polygon_with_holes_2> res;
S.polygons_with_holes (back_inserter (res));
list<Polygon_with_holes_2>::iterator i = res.begin();
Polygon_with_holes_2 mink = *i;
minkOuter = mink.outer_boundary();
cout << minkOuter << endl;
int numHoles = mink.holes_end()-mink.holes_begin();
cout << numHoles << endl;
Now I am working on isolating the holes, followed by breaking those down into each individual curve.
The doc here states that the value_type of a Hole_const_iterator is a General_polygon_2, which means that what you can iterate through all "curves" using "holes_begin()" and "holes-end", like you thought. To do that, use the following syntax:
for(auto h_it = mink.holes_begin(); h_it != mink.holes_end(); ++h_it)
{
//in here h_it is an iterator with value type General_polygon_2, so *h_it will be a the polygon describing a hole. Every step of this loop will give you another hole.
}
Then, you can iterate the curves of each polygon with curves_begin() and curves_end() the same way.
So to iterate each curve of a polygon_with_holes:
for(auto h_it = mink.holes_begin(); h_it != mink.holes_end(); ++h_it)
{
for(auto curve_it = h_it->curves_begin(); curves_it != h_it->curves_end(); ++curves_it)
{
//*curves_it gives you a curve.
}
}

Is there a way to pass which "level" of structure is desired to a formula in (Arduino) C++?

I am not hugely experienced in C++ coding, but I learn pretty well as I go. But, I have not been able to properly query how to do this, may be using wrong terms or insufficiently expressing my desire. Here's the situation.
I have a lot of variables (3x12) that I have set up under a structure:
struct Tracking
{
String Title;
BoolArray n24hr;
bool State;
unsigned char Days, Weeks;
uint16_t Minutes, TotalMinutes, Daily, Weekly, Monthly, n7d[7], n4w[4];
} Components[3];
I also have code that performs basically the same thing 3 times but on different "levels", e.g. daily, weekly, monthly. It keeps tracks of status over those time periods, filling arrays, finding totals, and duty cycles, etc. It fills the minutes into days, and when that reaches a week, it puts the totals into a week format, and repeats until it reaches monthly levels. So basically, I have it doing something like:
in my main loop:
//calls status formula
StatusFormula();
in a separate file:
//status formula defined
void StatusFormula()
{
// for each element of Components:
//determine current status
//for daily
//add it to the correct spot in the array
//perform calculations on it
//when it reaches a week:
//add it to the correct spot in the next array
//perform calculations on it
//when it reaches a month:
//add it to the correct spot in the next array
//perform calculations on it
}
These calculations are all basically the same, the only differences are the structure member names & the constants for the calculations (i.e., MinsADay, DaysAWk, etc.).
I can get it to work this way, it just means a lot more lines and if I want to change something, I have to repeat it 3 times. What I want is something like this:
in my main loop:
//calls status formula
StatusFormula("Daily"); //sends the status formula information to decide which level (daily, weekly, monthly), it supposed to work on
if (Components[i].Minutes == MinsADay)
{
StatusFormula("Weekly"); //sends the status formula information to decide which level (daily, weekly, monthly), it supposed to work on
if (Components[i].Daily == DaysAWk)
{
StatusFormula("Monthly");
}
}
in a separate file:
//status formula defined
void StatusFormula()
{
//determine which level & variables to use (I would probably use case for this), then
//add it to the correct spot in the correct array
//perform calculations on it
}
I tried passing the level using a string, but it didn't work:
in my main loop:
StatusFormula(i, "Daily"); //sending data to formula, where i is value 0 to 2 for the Components array & defined earlier in the for loop.
in a separate file:
//formula defined as:
void StatusFormula(uint8_t counter, string level)
{Components[counter].level -= //etc... performing calculations as desired.
//so I thought this should evaluate to "Components[i].Daily -=" (& i would be a value 0 to 2) & treat it like the structure, but it doesn't work that way apparently.
I tried passing the structure & variable itself, but that didn't work either:
in my main loop:
StatusFormula(i, Components[i].Daily); //sending data to formula
in a separate file:
//formula defined as:
void StatusFormula(uint8_t counter, Tracking& level)
{level -= //etc... //(level should be Components[i].Daily -=" (& i would be a value 0 to 2)) this didn't work either.
I couldn't find any google searches to help me, and I trialed-and-errored a bunch of ways, but I couldn't figure out how to do that in C++, let alone on the Arduino platform. In Excel VBA, I would just have the variable passed as a string to the formula, which would substitute the word and then treat it like the variable that it is, but I couldn't make that happen in C++. Also to note, I am going to try and define this a separate file/tab so that my massive code file is easier to read/edit, in case that makes a difference. I would paste my code directly, but it is long and super confusing.
I guess what I am asking is how would I pass the structure and/or structure member to the formula in a way that would say the equivalent of:
case 1: //"Daily"
//use Components[i].Daily & Components[i].Minutes & MinsaDay
break;
case 2: //"Weekly"
//use Components[i].Weekly & Components[i].Days & DaysaWk
break;
//etc.
I feel like there should be a way & that I am just missing a small, vital piece. Several people in the comments suggested enums, and after researching, it might possibly be what I want, but I am having trouble visualizing it at the moment and need to do more research and examples. Any suggestions or examples on how to send the appropriate structure & members to the formula to be modified in it?

Sequential draw commands with glVertexAttribBinding not working as expected

I have a struct Vertex{glm::vec4 t,n,v;}. I have written a obj loader that takes two parameters, obj file path as string and reference to a vector of 'Vertex'es. This function populates my vector and returns the number of indices(In my case indices are just sequential numbers, anyway).
As I have 6 objects to render, after using that function 6 times I have the following
vector<Vertex> objects[6];
GLint SIZES[6],OFFSETS[6],SIZES_I[6],OFFSETS_I[6];
filled. SIZES are number of 'Vertex'es(object[i].size()) and SIZES_I are number of indices. The offsets are calculated as below
for(int i=0;i<6;i++)
{
if(i==0)
{
OFFSETS[0]=0;OFFSETS_I[0]=0;
}
else
{
OFFSETS[i]=OFFSETS[i-1]+SIZES[i-1];
OFFSETS_I[i]=OFFSETS_I[i-1]+SIZES_S[i-1];
}
}
I transferred vectors of Vertex into a single VBO all back to back. Similarly for indices, transferred into buffer bound to element array buffer. That part is shown below.
glBufferData(GL_ARRAY_BUFFER,(OFFSETS[5]+SIZES[5])*sizeof(Vertex),data,GL_STATIC_DRAW);
for(int i=0;i<6;i++)
{
glBindVertexBuffer(i,buffer[0],OFFSETS[i]*sizeof(Vertex),sizeof(Vertex));
}
glBufferData(GL_ELEMENT_ARRAY_BUFFER,(OFFSETS_I[5]+SIZES_I[5])*sizeof(GLuint),indices,GL_STATIC_DRAW);
glVertexAttribFormat(0,4,GL_FLOAT,GL_FALSE,offsetof(Vertex,v));
Now comes my problem. Of the two rendering codes shown below the first one doesn't work but the second works perfectly.
for(int i=0;i<6;i++)
{
glVertexAttribBinding(0,i);
glDrawElements(GL_TRIANGLES,SIZES_I[i],GL_UNSIGNED_INT,reinterpret_cast<void*>(OFFSETS_I[i]*sizeof(GLuint));
}
//second
glVertexAttribBinding(0,0);
for(int i=0;i<6;i++)
glDrawElementsBaseVertex(GL_TRIANGLES,SIZES_I[i],GL_UNSIGNED_INT,reinterpret_cast<void*>(OFFSETS_I[i]*sizeof(GLuint)),OFFSETS[i]);
To summarily say what I have done so u guys can understand whats going on here, in the first case i created 6 buffer bindings on the same buffer with 6 offsets. In the second case there is only one binding, but I used base vertex to offset 6 times. Btw both are compiling, so ignore any typos as I typed all this in my tab.
My first attempt at debugging: Since base vertex approach is working, obj loader is fine. Anyway to make sure of it, I just loaded a single model. Its working fine.
My second attempt at debugging: My suspicion naturally fell on binding calls and offsets. To resolve this, I removed the for loop in the first method and initialized i with 0(Since second method i.e. base vertex method works, we dont bother with it). My first model appeared on screen. Next I initialized 'i' variable with 1. My second model was displayed on screen. This I repeated till i=5. Each of my 6 models were displayed correctly. So my models were displayed individually. But when I combine my calls sequentially, I get some full models, some partial models and some not at all.
My third attempt at debugging: It seems that only last 2 models and so are displayed. Remaining are not drawn or partially drawn. So I reversed my for loop starting with i=5 and decrementing. Now first 2 models and so are displayed(Here 'first two' and 'last two' refers to the order in which models are loaded in obj reader. I did not change that). It is as if the subsequent drawing commands are somehow making the work of earlier drawing commands vanish. Sort of.
Thats it. Here I hit a dead end. Any ideas what might be wrong or how I might proceed with further debugging?
Turned out that it is due to a bug in my driver. The same code worked in my colleague's computer.

C++ finding n points as close as possible to given xy

In RTS games, when you move some units, they find path and go to the places that are the closest to the selected place. I dont know how to select those places, I mean the target points for each unit.
For example, when I send 9 troops, I want them to have TARGETS like this:
. - empty,
T - targets for units,
O - the place that I've choosen to move them, target for unit too
.....
.TTT.
.TOT.
.TTT.
.....
Pathfinding algorithm is ready, just I need to generate the list (or vector) of target points, one for each unit. I dont want the complete code, but just some advices and ideas... Well I have to mind that not all places are walkable...
Thanx for any replies and sorry for my bad english...
You could use a BFS from the allocated point. "Fill" the selected tile with a unit if it is a tile that can hold a unit [not an obstacle]. Keep doing it until you "exhausted" the number of units.
In pseudo-code:
selectTargetLocation(point,units):
currUnit <- 0
queue<- new queue
visited <- {}
map<unit,point> <- empty map
queue.push(point)
while (queue.empty() == false):
current <- queue.takeFirst()
visited.add(current)
for each p such that p and current are neighbors: //insert neighbors to queue
if p is not in visited:
queue.push(p)
if current is not an obstacle:
map.put(unit[currUnit++],current)
if (currUnit == units.length) break //break when exhausted all units
return map
My idea would be like this: first, test if the destination is occupied, or a unit already has that destination. If this is the case, than you need to find a close point that is free. You could push all the near points to a queue, of the current point and so on... similar to fill algorithm), until you find a point that is not occupied. Then, find a path to that location.

How can I find the actual path found by BFS?

The problem I'm trying to solve concerns a tree of MRT system.
Each node can be connected to 4 points at most, which simplify thing by a lot. Here's my thought.
struct stop {
int path, id;
stop* a;
stop* b;
stop* c;
stop* d;
};
I can write code to save all the information I need for BFS to search for all the points, but my main concern is that, even though BFS finds the point properly, how can I know its path?
BFS will search each level, and when one of it reaches my destination, it will jump out of the run loop, and then, I will get a visited queue and an unvisited queue, how am i supposed to tell the user what stops he needs to visit when the visited queue is filled with every nodes BFS has searched?
To do so, you need to store a map:V->V (from vertices to vertices), which will map from each node v, the vertex u that "discovered" v.
You will populate this map during the iterations of BFS.
Later - you can reconstruct the path by simply going from the target node (in the map) up until you get back to the source, which will be your path (reversed, of course).
Note that this map can be implemented as an array if you enumerate the vertices.