Thread: vector representation

Code:

std :: vector <QString, QString, std :: vector <QString, std :: vector <QString>, QString> > configFileDataVector;

This results in:

Code:

error: wrong number of template arguments (3, should be 2)

/usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_vector.h:170: error: provided for ‘template<class _Tp, class _Alloc> class std::vector’

What I am missing here now, please point out, is it totally wrong to represent vectors this way?

Well, yes. Generally you only get to have one thing in your pointy brackets for a vector. You can make that type a compound type if you want, i.e., you can declare a class/struct that contains some strings, and then make a vector of those if that's what you need.

Originally Posted by tabstop

Well, yes. Generally you only get to have one thing in your pointy brackets for a vector.

Thanks for replying, but why did you mention Generally? Isn't it always?

Well, as the error message shows, you can provide a second template argument which is the memory allocator you wish to use (i.e., as a replacement to new). I've never used it, nor have I felt a need to, but it's there.

I was confused unnecessarily for no obvious reasons Thanks.

Well, can the structure I showed here be represented with a combination of vectors, maps and pairs in any way?

Originally Posted by AnishaKaul

Well, can the structure I showed here be represented with a combination of vectors, maps and pairs in any way?

You're assuming that there is such a thing as "the structure [shown] here", which there isn't. None of us have any idea what, exactly, you're looking for. A vector of three-component objects? A map from the first object to the other two? A triple? Something else?

Originally Posted by tabstop

You're assuming that there is such a thing as "the structure [shown] here", which there isn't. None of us have any idea what, exactly, you're looking for. A vector of three-component objects? A map from the first object to the other two? A triple? Something else?

Thanks for bothering

One incomplete rough way of representing the structure shown in my first post is by using "structures":

Code:

struct x
{
	string name;
	int id;
};

struct y
{
	string name;
	int id;
	vector <x> xVector;
};

class z
{
       vector <y> yVector;
}

My question is: Can I avoid using structures somehow and put every thing in the class itself?

Originally Posted by AnishaKaul

Thanks for bothering

One incomplete rough way of representing the structure shown in my first post is by using "structures":

Code:

struct x
{
	string name;
	int id;
};

struct y
{
	string name;
	int id;
	vector <x> xVector;
};

class z
{
       vector <y> yVector;
}

My question is: Can I avoid using structures somehow and put every thing in the class itself?

Yeah, that's actually a pretty complete and finished way of representing what you want to have happen. (I would never have gotten there from what you posted in the original post, though.)