What is mean by delegates in c++, does sort function in c/c++ which takes a compare function/functor as last parameter is a form of delegate?
"delegate" is not really a part of the C++ terminology. In C# it's something like a glorified function pointer which can store the address of an object as well to invoke member functions. You can certainly write something like this in C++ as a small library feature. Or even more generic: Combine boost::bind<> with boost::function<>.
In C++ we use the term "function object". A function object is anything (including function pointers) that is "callable" via the function call operator().
std::sort takes a "predicate" which is a special function object that doesn't modify its arguments and returns a boolean value.
Callback functions in C++ can be (loosely) referred as a form of delegates ( though delegate term is not used for this). The callback functions use Pointers to Functions to pass them as parameters to other functions.
But delegates in C# is more advanced compared to callback functions in C++.
To delegate work means to share the work load with others. In real life, if you were to delegate your task, ie if you are a manager, you would be sharing your work expecting others to complete a task without you having to know how.
The concept is the same in C++ and any other languages having the capability of delegates. In C you could see this as a delegate:
int calculate(int (*func)(int c), int a, int b)
Because you are expected to send a pointer, to another function which will compute some work for you. I recently wrote a blog post on function pointers in Python and C, check it out, you might find it helpfull. This might not be the "traditional" way to delegate work in C or C++, but then again, the termonoligy says i am a bit right.
Delegation is mostly used as a way to pass functions to functionality embedded in a class (pimpl, aggregation, private inheritance). They are mainly (inlined) functions of one line, calling functions of member-classes. As far as I know, it has nothing to do with C#'s delegates.
In this sense, a function-pointer as used in qsort is not a delegate, but a callback in which framework modules can be extended by user-software as in the Hollywood principle.
Delegate: An object that acts like a multi-function pointer with a subscription system. It really simplifies the use of static or 'object' member function pointers for callback notifications and event handling.
This link explains Delegates in a lucid manner or you may also refer to the MSDN link.
Related
So here's the situation: I'm using C++, SDL and GLConsole in conjunction. I have a class, SDLGame, which has the Init(), Loop(), Render() etc - essentially, it holds the logic for my game class.
GLConsole is a nice library so far - it lets me define CVars and such, even inside my SDL class. However, when defining commands, I have to specify a ConsoleFunc, which is typedef'd as
typedef bool (*ConsoleFunc)( std::vector<std::string> *args);
Simple enough. However, like I said, my functions are all in my class, and I know I can't pass pointer-to-class-functions as pointer-to-function arguments. I can't define static functions or make functions outside my class because some of these ConsoleFuncs must access class data members to be useful. I'd like to keep it OOP, since - well, OOP is nice.
Well, I actually have this problem "solved" - but it's extremely ugly. I just have an instance of SDLGame declared as an extern variable, and use that in my ConsoleFuncs/main class.
So, the question is: Is there a way to do this that isn't stupid and dumb like the way I am doing it? (Alternatively: is there a console library like GLConsole that supports SDL and can do what I'm describing?)
If the only interface you have is that function pointer, then you're screwed.
A member function needs a this pointer to be called, and if you have no way of passing that, you're out of luck (I guess the std::vector<std::string>* args pointer is what you get passed from the library).
In other words, even though that library uses C++ containers, it's not a good C++ library, because it relies on free functions for callbacks. A good C++ library would use boost::function or something similar, or would at the very least let you pass a void* user_data pointer that gets passed through to your callback. If you had that, you could pass the this pointer of your class, cast it back inside the callback, and call the appropriate member function.
I am new to Objective-C and I need to overcome the following issue.
I am trying to develop a front-end for a C library and I need to somehow get the address of an Objective-C member function and pass it to the library.
For instance: here's what I would do in C++
class MyClass
{
public:
void my function();
void some_other_function()
{ connect_signal(my_function); }
};
Here, I just pass the address of my_function() to connect_signal.
Is that possible in Objective-C? Any other ideas?
My second choice would be to simply write a C function out of the class that would call the Objective-C function.
Thanks in advance
There’s a methodForSelector: method that returns an IMP, a pointer to the implementation of a method for given selector (related question). Is that what you’re after?
And as a more general remark, using a pointer to a method implementation is usually too much magic. Is there a higher-level, more “ordinary” solution to your use case? (I can’t really imagine the details from what you wrote in the question.)
For the record, you can't connect a signal to a nonstatic C++ function. At least not in the *nix meaning of signals. Those need a this pointer for invokation.
Now, about Objective C. Depends on what do you want to do - pass a pointer to an Objective C method to a plain-C API, or implement a signal-like callback mechanism of your own. Other answers concentrate on the former; let's talk the latter.
The natural thing to do is passing around a combination of a selector and an object pointer. Selectors have datatype SEL and are retrieved using the #selector() construct. A selector is a piece of data (really an integer) that uniquely identifies a method within a class hierarchy.
Let's imagine you have a connect_signal function somewhere that wants a callback:
-(void)connect_signal:(SEL)callbackSelector forObject:(NSObject*)callbackObject;
You call it like this (from within the callback object):
[xx connect_signal:#selector(MyMethod:) forObject:self];
Within the function, you save the selector and the object pointer. When you need to invoke the callback, you would issue the following call:
[SavedCallbackObject performSelector:(SavedCallbackSelector) withObject: nil];
The second parameter is for passing parameters to the callback; if you need more than one, see NSInvoke.
My answer is assuming Cocoa. NSObject, e. g. is a Cocoa class. It's a safe bet for ObjC questions these days, considering.
Or you can use good old function pointers. They're still around.
An Objective-C method implementation (IMP) is a C function that takes at least two arguments; the target of the method call (self) and the selector to be invoked (_cmd).
Thus, passing an IMP to your C API won't work.
Your best bet is to pass a C function. Assuming your C API is sensible and has an "arbitrary user context pointer thingy", something like:
void myfunc(void *context) {
[(MyClass *)context callback];
}
I recently started working on an iOS game and decided to write a distinct part of the project in C++. This approach seems to work fine as long as the Objective C classes simply access some members or call functions on the C++ objects. However i can't seem to find an elegant way to make my Objective C classes respond to 'events' in the C++ classes. Any event handling system that uses callbacks seems out of the question (since Objective C methods and C++ functions and probably not interchangeable). All i can think of is using the delegate pattern and writing wrapper classes around my C++ delegate classes so i can use them in Objective C code. So my question is: Is there a better way of doing this?
NB:
I would like to prevent using Objective C directly in my C++ files, since these classes are supposed to be platform independent.
You may want to consider the mechanism that CoreVideo uses.
In their model, they have a mechanism which involves registering a C callback function( http://tinyurl.com/axtxajf ), and one of the parameters to this function is a void*, which can be typecast to the Objective-C class you need access to.
Here is an example of a C function you may implement in your C++ modules to register the callback function. The parameter are the callback function and the pointer to the class instance:
SetEventCallback(EventCallbackFunction, self);
When the event needs to be handled, the callback function is called, and you can typecast the void* to call Obj-C class and invoke the method:
void EventCallbackFunction(void* objCPtr)
{
[(MyObjCClass*)objCPtr someMethod];
}
You could use C++0x lambda functions, they are interchangeable (assignable to each other) with Objective-C blocks.
So here's the situation: I'm using C++, SDL and GLConsole in conjunction. I have a class, SDLGame, which has the Init(), Loop(), Render() etc - essentially, it holds the logic for my game class.
GLConsole is a nice library so far - it lets me define CVars and such, even inside my SDL class. However, when defining commands, I have to specify a ConsoleFunc, which is typedef'd as
typedef bool (*ConsoleFunc)( std::vector<std::string> *args);
Simple enough. However, like I said, my functions are all in my class, and I know I can't pass pointer-to-class-functions as pointer-to-function arguments. I can't define static functions or make functions outside my class because some of these ConsoleFuncs must access class data members to be useful. I'd like to keep it OOP, since - well, OOP is nice.
Well, I actually have this problem "solved" - but it's extremely ugly. I just have an instance of SDLGame declared as an extern variable, and use that in my ConsoleFuncs/main class.
So, the question is: Is there a way to do this that isn't stupid and dumb like the way I am doing it? (Alternatively: is there a console library like GLConsole that supports SDL and can do what I'm describing?)
If the only interface you have is that function pointer, then you're screwed.
A member function needs a this pointer to be called, and if you have no way of passing that, you're out of luck (I guess the std::vector<std::string>* args pointer is what you get passed from the library).
In other words, even though that library uses C++ containers, it's not a good C++ library, because it relies on free functions for callbacks. A good C++ library would use boost::function or something similar, or would at the very least let you pass a void* user_data pointer that gets passed through to your callback. If you had that, you could pass the this pointer of your class, cast it back inside the callback, and call the appropriate member function.
I'm working at a module that use a callback system that wasn't implemented very nice. The clients are registering with an ID and will be called back with a variable (or two, or none). The problem is that for almost every ID is a different variable. (Ex: Id1 -> char*, Id2 -> int). This is achieved by passing variable via a pointer. So callback looks like
typedef void (*NotifFunctionPtr)(void* ctx, const void* option);
There are many problems with this approach like, and I want to replace this with a (type) safe and modern way of handling this. However this isn't as simple as it looks like, I have some ideas (like boost::function or replacing the void* with a struct that encapsulate type and ptr) but i think maybe there is a better idea, so I was wondering what is the modern way of settings a typesafe callback in C++.
Edit: Another idea is registering an callback with a type T via a template function that calls back with the same type T. Is this viable or implemented in a library somewere ?
Your problem is not that of callbacks, but rather that you want to treat all callbacks as the same type, when they are not (the signatures are different). So either you do the nasty C void* trick or if you want to use a type-safe approach you will have to pay for it, and provide different methods to register the different callback types --which IMHO is the right way.
Once you have solved that, you can use the signals or signals2 libraries or else implement your own wheel using function as a base (to avoid having to rewrite the type erasure).
boost::function is just the right choice here. You gain the type-safety of function objects without having to change the code much.
If you already looked into boost. Why not use the signals or signals2 library.