Though implementation problem

This is a discussion on Though implementation problem within the C++ Programming forums, part of the General Programming Boards category; Thanks for a nice explanation CornedBeed! Originally Posted by CornedBee (1) Using for loops: Code: for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = v.begin(); it ...

  1. #106
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    678
    Thanks for a nice explanation CornedBeed!

    Quote Originally Posted by CornedBee View Post
    (1) Using for loops:
    Code:
    for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = v.begin(); it != v.end(); ++it) {
      std::cout << *it << " bottles of beer.\n";
    }
    for(std::list<int>::iterator it = l.begin(); it != l.end(); ++it) {
      std::cout << *it << " red balloons.\n";
    }
    (2) Using for_each:
    Code:
    std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), std::cout << lambda::_1 << " bottles of beer.\n");
    std::for_each(l.begin(), l.end(), std::cout << lambda::_1 << " red balloons.\n");
    Can you tell me why (2) is better than (1)? (2) Requires so much understanding of underground stuff! Whereas for ( ; ; ) is known to every C++ beginner!?

    Of course, it's even nicer if you get yet more specialized, using Boost's Range and (candidate) RangeEx libraries:
    Code:
    rex::for_each(v, std::cout << lambda::_1 << " bottles of beer.\n");
    rex::for_each(l, std::cout << lambda::_1 << " red balloons.\n");
    Do you know the size of boost? I had a hard time downloading it. I was helping a friend! ()
    And what help it has over the plain and simple for() loop?

    All the rest you said was more like a learning to me, so I agree!

  2. #107
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,456
    Can you tell me why (2) is better than (1)?
    Personally, I find it better because of a change in thought pattern. With a loop, I am inclined to think about how the loop works. With the application of such a generic algorithm, I am inclined to think about the range that is being processed. In this case the code happens to be shorter too, but if you write out a function object separately that would not be the case.

    (2) Requires so much understanding of underground stuff! Whereas for ( ; ; ) is known to every C++ beginner!?
    That should not be a concern though: the question is whether the code would be easy to understand once one understands the constructs.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  3. #108
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    If you don't mind me asking, I was going to ask:
    The function Find is const because it does not change the class data, but it returns a non-const iterator, allowing the data later to be changed. Am I to interpret that Find should not be const or should I circumvent this?

    I get issues either way.
    If it's const, then, I cannot do:
    Code:
    if (uint32_t(pEnd - pStart) < nFindLength) return end(); //iterator(this, m_pUnusedStart);
    But if it isn't const, then, this will fail (another function):
    Code:
    nIndex = strToSplit.Find(strSplitWhat, nLastIndex);
    strToSplit is:
    Code:
    const Strings::CStringEx& strToSplit
    So the problem is that if I remove the const, that line won't work. I have to remove const from the reference. And that, in turns, means that I cannot pass a regular string into the function, because that won't break the const only rule for references.

    Any ideas?
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  4. #109
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,456
    The function Find is const because it does not change the class data, but it returns a non-const iterator, allowing the data later to be changed. Am I to interpret that Find should not be const or should I circumvent this?
    I think there should be two versions of Find. One should be a const member function that returns a const iterator, the other should be a non-const member function that returns a non-const iterator.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  5. #110
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    Hmmm.
    Does that mean that an "internal" replace must return an integer or perhaps a pointer to the buffer instead of an iterator, then...? Seeing as I cannot call a non-const function from a const function and I cannot assign a const iterator to a non-const iterator.

    One more thing, though. If the function was to be separated (ie free), then how would you go about it, since it needs an "internal" function that should not be called directly.
    Code:
     template<typename StrType> void Replace(const StrType& strSrc, const StrType&
    		strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith);
    	//template<typename StrType, typename ItType> void Replace(const StrType&
    		strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith, const ItType& vStart);
    	template<typename StrType, typename ItType> void Replace(const StrType& strSrc,
    		const StrType& strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith, const ItType& vStart, 
    		const ItType& vEnd);
    	// NOT TO BE CALLED DIRECTLY
    	template<typename StrType, typename ItType> int32_t ReplaceInternal(const StrType&
    		strSrc, const StrType& strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith, bool bReplace, 
    		const ItType& vStart, const ItType& vEnd);
    Am I just supposed to do that or go about it another way?
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  6. #111
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    678
    Enough Hijacking!!!
    The people here are 'Concrete Minded'! Like me!
    Over to your real problem now!

    Have you thought, why you are having so many problems?

    You are constantly being bitten by how-to-do-it-in-C++!
    Later on poor users of your class may be wondering how-to-use-it-in-my-program?

    I guess, either you do not know enough C++ to do this, OR, C++ is so much of a Language, that no body, except Him, knows it well! *_*

  7. #112
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    890
    Quote Originally Posted by manav View Post
    Can you tell me why (2) is better than (1)? (2) Requires so much understanding of underground stuff! Whereas for ( ; ; ) is known to every C++ beginner!?
    FYI, there are some good discussions about this on comp.lang.c++.

  8. #113
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    Quote Originally Posted by manav View Post
    Have you thought, why you are having so many problems?
    You are constantly being bitten by how-to-do-it-in-C++!
    Later on poor users of your class may be wondering how-to-use-it-in-my-program?
    Don't be silly. I'm trying to make it as easy as possible.
    For example:
    Code:
    void foo(std::string& mystr) { }
    void foo2(const std::string& mystr) { }
    int main()
    {
        foo("test"); // Won't work
        foo2("test"); // Will work
    }
    Returning an iterator, for example, allows you to do all kinds of fun manipulations very easily.

    Quote Originally Posted by manav View Post
    I guess, either you do not know enough C++ to do this
    Don't be silly. Of course I know ways around it, but I was asking for advice.

    Quote Originally Posted by manav View Post
    ...OR, C++ is so much of a Language, that no body, except Him, knows it well! *_*
    Screw that religion. It annoys me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  9. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    678
    Quote Originally Posted by medievalelks View Post
    As promised! Thanks, i will see that link

    Quote Originally Posted by Elysia View Post
    Don't be silly.
    I was just a little concerned! Guess what, I know you know C++, hundred times more than I know! And I never had to use whatever you are using, even when it is almost a year, since I am working on this C++ project!

    Don't be silly. Of course I know ways around it, but I was asking for advice.
    I was not giving you advice, I was just wondering, that, if *you* are confused, what will happen to me, when I have to code it?!?

    Screw that religion. It annoys me.
    Him - Bjarne

  10. #115
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,456
    One more thing, though. If the function was to be separated (ie free), then how would you go about it, since it needs an "internal" function that should not be called directly.
    If it needs access to the internals then it should be a member or a friend. But since it does not need to be a member, it should be a friend. That said, it crosses my mind that it need not access the internals to begin with: the problem is one of finding a subrange in some range, so if you have the begin and end iterators of the range, and the begin and end iterators of the subrange, you can solve the problem. The std::search generic algorithm already solves this, so you just need to write a function to use it.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  11. #116
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    Quote Originally Posted by manav View Post
    I was just a little concerned! Guess what, I know you know C++, hundred times more than I know! And I never had to use whatever you are using, even when it is almost a year, since I am working on this C++ project!
    I'll let you use a prototype once I get it in working order!
    We'll see how easy you think it is to use!

    I was not giving you advice, I was just wondering, that, if *you* are confused, what will happen to me, when I have to code it?!?
    Your comments don't do justice to your thoughts, really.
    You will face these problems too, eventually. And you will struggle. But eventually you will learn.

    Him - Bjarne
    Err OK, that really sounded unambiguous. I take back my comment, then.

    Quote Originally Posted by laserlight View Post
    If it needs access to the internals then it should be a member or a friend. But since it does not need to be a member, it should be a friend. That said, it crosses my mind that it need not access the internals to begin with: the problem is one of finding a subrange in some range, so if you have the begin and end iterators of the range, and the begin and end iterators of the subrange, you can solve the problem. The std::search generic algorithm already solves this, so you just need to write a function to use it.
    I think you misunderstood that one.
    The "internal" replace as you see requires more arguments (especially the bool) then the "normal" Replace. The "normal" replace comes in two variants and is supposed to be the public interface. It will do whatever is necessary and call the "internal" function.
    With classes, I could hide the internal function, but if Replace is free, then I can't hide that internal function. It shouldn't be called directly, so I was wondering the best way of doing it? Should I just let it lie there or put it in a private header or so?
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  12. #117
    C++ Witch laserlight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    21,456
    I think you misunderstood that one.
    The "internal" replace as you see requires more arguments (especially the bool) then the "normal" Replace. The "normal" replace comes in two variants and is supposed to be the public interface. It will do whatever is necessary and call the "internal" function.
    Actually, I am a little confused because you were talking about Find, but now you are talking about Replace

    With classes, I could hide the internal function, but if Replace is free, then I can't hide that internal function. It shouldn't be called directly, so I was wondering the best way of doing it?
    If that is the situation, then Replace should be a member function.
    C + C++ Compiler: MinGW port of GCC
    Version Control System: Bazaar

    Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart Way

  13. #118
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    Quote Originally Posted by laserlight View Post
    Actually, I am a little confused because you were talking about Find, but now you are talking about Replace
    Uhh ya, looking back, I can see why...
    Find had the const or not const iterator problem.
    Replace was broken out and have the private interface problem.

    If that is the situation, then Replace should be a member function.
    I mean, currently it looks like:
    Code:
     template<typename StrType> void Replace(const StrType& strSrc,
    		const StrType& strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith)
    	{
    		Replace(strSrc, strReplaceWhat, strReplaceWith,
    			strReplaceWhat.begin(), strReplaceWhat.end());
    	}
    	//template<typename StrType, typename ItType> void Replace(const
    		StrType& strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith, const ItType& vStart);
    	template<typename StrType, typename ItType> void Replace(const StrType& strSrc,
    		const StrType& strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith, const ItType& vStart, 
    		const ItType& vEnd)
    	{
    		int32_t nNeededSize = ReplaceInternal(strSrc, strReplaceWhat, strReplaceWith, false,
    			vStart, vEnd);
    		if (nNeededSize > 0) strSrc.resize(nNeededSize); //PrepareBuffer(nNeededSize);
    		ReplaceInternal(strSrc, strReplaceWhat, strReplaceWith, true, vStart, vEnd);
    	}
    
    	template<typename StrType, typename ItType> int32_t ReplaceInternal(const StrType& strSrc,
    		const StrType& strReplaceWhat, const StrType& strReplaceWith, bool bReplace,
    		const ItType& vStart, const ItType& vEnd)
    Replace is the public interface of the free function that you should call to do the work.
    Then they will wrap ReplaceInternal that will do the actual replacing.
    But ReplaceInternal shouldn't be called directly because 1) it takes a bool that should not be passed directly and 2) it has only one version - the one that takes a range. Therefore ReplaceInternal should be hidden away from prying eyes, but since it's free it cannot.
    But making it a member will destroy the essence of generic functions...
    Unless ReplaceInternal can wrap other generic functions to do its work. Perhaps that might be a good idea? Then ReplaceInternal could be made a member.
    Last edited by Elysia; 05-13-2008 at 05:40 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  14. #119
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    678
    Thinking along the lines ...
    Code:
    Replace(DestSeq, startDest, endDest, SrcSeq, startSrc, endSrc) ...
    Pretty generic, reusable, ... can replace an Elephant with an Ant also!

    // Do not mind the mildly exaggerated tone of my post, but isn't that a possible solution?

  15. #120
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,455
    No, it's not the interface per se that's the problem, but the internal mechanisms.
    And it should be Replace(What, With, Start, End).
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. WS_POPUP, continuation of old problem
    By blurrymadness in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-20-2007, 06:54 PM
  2. Laptop Problem
    By Boomba in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-07-2006, 05:24 PM
  3. implementation file
    By bejiz in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-28-2005, 12:59 AM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-07-2005, 10:34 PM
  5. Memory Problem - I think...
    By Unregistered in forum C Programming
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-24-2001, 12:14 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21