A Question about maps and sets

//I'm talking about the std::map and std::set here.

Consider the following situation:

I have a set defined as follows;

Code:

---

std::set<std::string> operators = {"+","-","*","/","^","&","=",":",".","%"};

---

I also have a map declared as follows;

Code:

---

typedef token (*opfunc)(std::vector<token>);
std::map<std::string,opfunc);

---

Is there a way to *link* the contents of the former set to the later map, possibly with another container ? (I'd assign the function pointers by hand)

What's wrong with

map.insert("+", &your_function);

?

Also, I'd make sure the function takes a reference to the vector for efficiency's sake.

(Perhaps a good question would be: what are you trying to do?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elysia

What's wrong with

map.insert("+", &your_function);

?

Also, I'd make sure the function takes a reference to the vector for efficiency's sake.

(Perhaps a good question would be: what are you trying to do?)

---

I do not have a problem with the insertion.

What I'm trying to do :
*Short Term : I have an Operator class which has a std::string member. I want to invoke the function assigned to the Operator from an object of the class. With the ( ) operator, or otherwise.
But I also have a std::set of all permitted Operator strings.
Is it possible to keep that a set and also launch the functions from the iterator returned by the find( ) algorithm ?

*Long Term : Making a simple interpreter

I still don't see why you don't have a map of allowed operations which are mapped to an appropriate function.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elysia

I still don't see why you don't have a map of allowed operations which are mapped to an appropriate function.

---

I forgot that map has a find() too .

btw.. Are those find `s similar in complexity?

Yes, both have logarithmic lookup time.