vector of pointers and assignment within function

I'm having trouble using a function call to assign values to an empty vector of pointers. I can use a function to assign values to an ordinary array of pointers, but when I try to do the same using a vector, the assignment fails.

In the following code, the call to the vector function assigns values within the function scope, but outside the scope (i.e. in "main") the vector remains empty.

The output of this code is:
Size in function: 5
Size in main: 0

What am I missing?

Code:

---

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>

using namespace std;

void fillvector(vector<int*> v);

int main()
{
        int i;
        vector<int*> intvector;

        //try to fill vector with values
        fillvector(intvector);
 
        //check the result
        cout        << "\nSize in main: " << intvector.size() << flush;

        return 0;
}

void fillvector(vector<int*> v)
{
        int i;
        int* ptr;

        for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
                ptr = new int(i+1);
                v.push_back(ptr);
        }
        cout << "\nSize in function: " << v.size() << flush;
}

---

You're passing the vector by value, which just makes a local copy of it.
Pass it by reference instead.

You passed the container by value: The vector had made a copy of itself and the function filled that copy. It would be your responsibility to assign the "new" container:

I would do it like this:

std::vector<int> v;
v = fillvector( v );

Do you mean, the function should be like this?

Code:

---

void fillvec(vector<int*>& v)

---

Thanks for you help!

BTW, why are you using dynamic memory here? In this example a vector<int> would be simpler. In a more complex example the memory leaks that you have now could cause problems for your program.

The vector (which will actually hold class objects, not ints as in my example) must hold a large data set, which is then processed to extract a much smaller subset. Once the subset has been extracted the larger set can then deleted to save memory.

Quote:

---

The vector (which will actually hold class objects, not ints as in my example) must hold a large data set, which is then processed to extract a much smaller subset. Once the subset has been extracted the larger set can then deleted to save memory.

---

Perhaps you would be better off creating the large vector of objects (not pointers) in a function, do the processing in that function, and then return (perhaps via an out parameter) the smaller subset result, leaving the temporary large data set to be destroyed automatically as control leaves the scope of the function. That way you take advantage of the memory management offered by the vector. Alternatively, you could use a vector of shared_ptrs, or look to Boost for a boost with ptr_vector.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by laserlight

Perhaps you would be better off creating the large vector of objects (not pointers) in a function, do the processing in that function, and then return (perhaps via an out parameter) the smaller subset result, leaving the temporary large data set to be destroyed automatically as control leaves the scope of the function...

---

Good idea! I'm just learning to use the STL. One thing I don't understand: why do I need to pass a vector of pointers by reference, but I don't need to pass an array of pointers by reference? For example, this works fine:

Code:

---

void arrayfct(int* n)
{ int i;
  for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) { n[i] = i; }
}

---

Quote:

---

why do I need to pass a vector of pointers by reference, but I don't need to pass an array of pointers by reference?

---

A vector, like all other objects, is passed by value, so if you fail to pass it by reference or pass a pointer to it, then the function operates on a copy of the vector instead of the vector itself. An array, on the other hand, is converted to a pointer to its first element when passed as an argument, so the function operates on the elements of the array itself, not a copy of them.

Because a vector is a single object, and an array is multiple objects (in this case integers).

Similarly, if you wanted to pass an array of vectors, that would be passed as a single pointer to the first integer.

Yes, it's sort of inconsistent, but you have to accept that's the way C is.

--
Mats

Ahhh, I see now! Thank you. I just joined this group. It seems very active and helpful! :)