I'm confused please help!

hi i'm a little confused about resolution operator (i think thats the name in english)

Code:

---

::

---

.

i can use the string class usng it that way:

Code:

---

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

//can use any string class function without problem
#include<string>
using std::string;

int main()
{
    string my_name = "TerraKota";
   
//need to know my_name size, so i use the size() method.
  cout << "You name is: " << my_name.size() << "chars long";
   
//now if i need to store my name size into a variable i must
//declare a size_type:

  size_type nameSize = my_name.size();
 
//ok here the compiler generates an error:
//C:\programas c++\ejer17_6\main.cpp(21) : error    C2065: 'size_type' : undeclared identifier//
 
//but if i use :
    string:: size_type nameSize = my_name.size();
//everything is fine.
    return 0;
}

---

so the question:
if I include
<string>
and use the string class
using std::string

why i need to use string::size_type everytime i need to use the return value of the size() method?
maybe im confused about namespaces etc, any help?

and please excuse my poor english

because you only declared that you are using the std namespace for string not for anything thing else if you want everything to be in the std namespace then use using namespace std; and you won't need to std:: anything

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terracota

so the question:
if I include
<string>
and use the string class
using std::string

why i need to use string::size_type everytime i need to use the return value of the size() method?
maybe im confused about namespaces etc, any help?

---

You won't need to do that if you also have using string::size_type; at the top of your program after the using std::string;.

Having using std::string; simply means you don't have to put std:: in front of all your string declarations in your code, it does nothing to help you resolve the scope of what is in this case a typedef'd item within the string class.

yes but im using std::string

I guess im not important enough to listen to. size_type does not have anything to do with string so its in its own seperate namespace so just put using std::size_type.

>>I guess im not important enough to listen to. size_type does not have anything to do with string so its in its own seperate namespace so just put using std::size_type.

I don't think so...

Here is part of the basic_string class (i cut out some parts):

Code:

---

class basic_string
{
private:
  struct Rep {
    size_t len, res, ref;
    bool selfish;

    charT* data () { return reinterpret_cast<charT *>(this + 1); }
    charT& operator[] (size_t s) { return data () [s]; }
    charT* grab () { if (selfish) return clone (); ++ref; return data (); }
//...
    inline static void * operator new (size_t, size_t);
    inline static void operator delete (void *);
    inline static Rep* create (size_t);
    charT* clone ();

    inline void copy (size_t, const charT *, size_t);
    inline void move (size_t, const charT *, size_t);
    inline void set  (size_t, const charT,  size_t);

    inline static bool excess_slop (size_t, size_t);
    inline static size_t frob_size (size_t);

  private:
    Rep &operator= (const Rep &);
  };

public:
// types:
  typedef          traits                traits_type;
  typedef typename traits::char_type        value_type;
  typedef          Allocator                allocator_type;
  typedef size_t size_type;
//...
};

---

As you can see, size_type is a typedef inside the std::basic_string class (and the std::string class is probably a typedef of the basic_string class)

So you have to use scope resolution to specify that something is part of a class, structure or namespace

ok i understand that but if i include <string> the compiler "knows" wjeres defined size_type
so i dont need to use string::size_type. or Im wrong?

size_type is defined in many different classes inside the standard library, so how would the compiler know that you want the string class's version? Yes, when you include <string>, the compiler sees one version of size_type, but it doesn't know that it is the one you want. It is the same concept as when you put using std::string. In that case, you are saying to the compiler, when I type "string", and you are trying to figure out what I meant, make sure to look in the std namespace for the definition. If you want to just use size_type, you must tell the compiler to look inside the string class for its definition.

When you nest classes or typedefs or enums inside of classes, you are making a direct, logical link between them. For example, you can nest classes:

Code:

---

class A
{
public:
  class B
  {
  public:
    int a;
  };
};

int main()
{
  int a;
  A::B myBInstance;
}

---

You can also nest enums:

Code:

---

class A
{
public:
  enum B
  {
    RED,
    GREEN,
    BLUE
  };
};

int main()
{
  int a;
  A::B myBEnum = RED;
}

---

You can also nest typedefs:

Code:

---

class A
{
public:
  typedef int A_IntType;
};

int main()
{
  int a = 3;
  A::A_IntType myInt = a;
}

---

So by adding the definition of the size_type typedef inside the basic_string class, the standard library designers are saying that when working with the basic_string class (or in your case, the string class), the data representing the size of the string has the type of size_type. You need the scope resolution operator because the size_type typedef is part of the string class, and you must distinguish between it and any other size_type definitions available.

As hk_mp5kpdw said, you could put using string::size_type; so that the compiler always looks in the string class to find size_type when trying to find the appropriate definition. Like I said, it's the same concept as std::, just one level deeper.

thanks for help
and jlou... know im clear with your explanation, thanks a lot!!!