Allowing a functor or a function to be stored in a class

[James Aguilar]

In the C++ STL, there are various places where you can call a function that
takes a functor as a parameter. This functor may be either a function object or
a function pointer. For instance, if you have a vector<char> and call for_each
on it, both of the methods below would be valid:

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;

struct MyFunctionObjec t
{
void operator ()(char a) {cout << a;};
};
void myFunction(char a) {cout << a;}

int main()
{
vector<char> v;
//fill it . . .
for_each(v.begi n(), v.end(), (MyFunctionObje ct()));
for_each(v.begi n(), v.end(), &myFunction) ;
return 0;
}

My question pertains to a similar issue: how do I cause the same to occur in a
class template? I would like my template to look like this:

template <typename CompT>
class WhyWontThisWork
{
CompT m_comparator;
public:
WhyWontThisWork (CompT cmpIn) : m_comparator(cm pIn) {}
void doThis(char a, char b) { if (m_comparator(a , b)) cout << "WIN"; }
};

Can I actually do this in C++ without writing an inordinate amount of code? If
so, how?

- JFA1

[Pete Becker]

James Aguilar wrote:

My question pertains to a similar issue: how do I cause the same to occur in a
class template? I would like my template to look like this:

template <typename CompT>
class WhyWontThisWork
{
CompT m_comparator;
public:
WhyWontThisWork (CompT cmpIn) : m_comparator(cm pIn) {}
void doThis(char a, char b) { if (m_comparator(a , b)) cout << "WIN"; }
};

Can I actually do this in C++ without writing an inordinate amount of code? If
so, how?

This works just fine. What problem did you encounter?

struct Comp
{
bool operator()(char a, char b) const { return a == b; }
};

int main()
{
Comp comp;
WhyWontThisWork <Comp> cmp(comp);
cmp.doThis('a', 'b');
cmp.doThis('a', 'a');
return 0;
}

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

[Victor Bazarov]

James Aguilar wrote:

In the C++ STL, there are various places where you can call a function that
takes a functor as a parameter. This functor may be either a function object or
a function pointer. For instance, if you have a vector<char> and call for_each
on it, both of the methods below would be valid:

#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;

struct MyFunctionObjec t
{
void operator ()(char a) {cout << a;};
};
void myFunction(char a) {cout << a;}

int main()
{
vector<char> v;
//fill it . . .
for_each(v.begi n(), v.end(), (MyFunctionObje ct()));
for_each(v.begi n(), v.end(), &myFunction) ;
return 0;
}

My question pertains to a similar issue: how do I cause the same to occur in a
class template? I would like my template to look like this:

template <typename CompT>
class WhyWontThisWork
{
CompT m_comparator;
public:
WhyWontThisWork (CompT cmpIn) : m_comparator(cm pIn) {}
I don't understand 'WhyWontThisWor k' bit of it.
void doThis(char a, char b) { if (m_comparator(a , b)) cout << "WIN"; }
};

Can I actually do this in C++ without writing an inordinate amount of code?
What's inordinate?

I don't see you even attempting to use your template. How can we continue
the discussion without you even trying?
If
so, how?

What book are you reading that doesn't explain templates? What section of
the FAQ regarding questions about some code that doesn't work don't you
understand? Am I using overly long sentences?

V

[James Aguilar]

"Victor Bazarov" <v.********@com Acast.net> wrote in message
news:IP******** **********@news read1.mlpsca01. us.to.verio.net ...

I don't see you even attempting to use your template. How can we continue
the discussion without you even trying?

OK.

//=== CODE ===
#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

template <typename CompT>
class Test
{
CompT m_comparator;
public:
Test(CompT cmpIn) : m_comparator(cm pIn) {}
void doThis(char a, char b) { if (m_comparator(a , b)) cout << "WIN"; }
};

class TestFunctionObj ect
{
public:
bool operator ()(char a, char b) {return a < b;}
};

bool testFunction(ch ar a, char b)
{
return a < b;
}

int main()
{
Test a(&testFunction );
Test b((TestFunction Object()));

a.doThis('a', 'b');
b.doThis('a', 'b');

return 0;
}
//=== CODE ===

For obvious reasons, this code does not compile. I didn't provide template
types for a or b in main. But that is really the question I am asking: is it
possible for me to have a class that can take a function pointer or a function
object in the constructor and treat them the same way (i.e. store them for later
use in another function)? If so, what is the type I need to use to replace
CompT?

- JFA1

[Pete Becker]

James Aguilar wrote:

Test(CompT cmpIn) : m_comparator(cm pIn) {}
If so, what is the type I need to use to replace
CompT?

Since CompT is the type of the argument that you're going to pass to the
constructor, that's the type you should specify. That's also why the
standard library provides the template functions bind1st() and bind2nd()
in addition to the template classes binder1st and binder2nd.

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

[Victor Bazarov]

James Aguilar wrote:

"Victor Bazarov" <v.********@com Acast.net> wrote in message
news:IP******** **********@news read1.mlpsca01. us.to.verio.net ...

I don't see you even attempting to use your template. How can we continue
the discussion without you even trying?

OK.

//=== CODE ===
#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

template <typename CompT>
class Test
{
CompT m_comparator;
public:
Test(CompT cmpIn) : m_comparator(cm pIn) {}
void doThis(char a, char b) { if (m_comparator(a , b)) cout << "WIN"; }
};

class TestFunctionObj ect
{
public:
bool operator ()(char a, char b) {return a < b;}
};

bool testFunction(ch ar a, char b)
{
return a < b;
}

int main()
{
Test a(&testFunction );
Test b((TestFunction Object()));

a.doThis('a', 'b');
b.doThis('a', 'b');

return 0;
}
//=== CODE ===

For obvious reasons, this code does not compile.

Well, DUH!
I didn't provide template
types for a or b in main. But that is really the question I am asking: is it
possible for me to have a class that can take a function pointer or a function
object in the constructor and treat them the same way (i.e. store them for later
use in another function)? If so, what is the type I need to use to replace
CompT?

Of course not. "Test" is a template. It needs an argument. The class
'TestFunctionOb ject' and the function 'testFunction' have different types.
You cannot expect your 'Test' template to become one and the same if you
instantiate it with two different types, now, can you?

You can always make your 'Test' class take a functor but to use, say,
functions with it you'd have to provide a separate object. Example:

struct myFunctor_base {
virtual void operator() const (char a, char b) = 0;
};

struct function_to_myF unctor_adapter : myFunctor_base {
void (*pfunc)(char,c har);
function_to_myF unctor_adapter( void (*p)(char,char) ) : pfunc(p) {}
void operator()(char a, char b) const {
return pfunc(a,b);
}
};

struct myFunctor : myFunctor_base {
void operator()(char ,char) const; // implemented elsewhere
};

class Test {
myFunctor_base const& f;
public:
Test(myFunctor_ base const& ff) : f(ff) {}
void doThis(char a, char b) { f(a,b); }
};

void myFunction(char a, char b);

int main() {
Test a = Test(myFunctor( ));
Test b = Test(function_t o_myFunctor_ada pter(myFunction ));
a.doThis('a', 'b');
b.doThis('a', 'b');
}

Now, this probably constitutes (how did you put it?) inordinate amount
of code, but that's essentially how you can do it.

V

[James Aguilar]

"Victor Bazarov" <v.********@com Acast.net> wrote in message
news:tq******** ***********@new sread1.mlpsca01 .us.to.verio.ne t...

Now, this probably constitutes (how did you put it?) inordinate amount
of code, but that's essentially how you can do it.

That's exactly how I put it, and yeah, it meets the criteria. I appreciate your
writing that code -- I probably wouldn't have if someone was asking me the same
question.

I take it that the solution to my problem is thus to choose one or the other
(function pointers or function objects) and stick with it, and not try to make
my stuff compatible with both?

- JFA1

[Pete Becker]

Victor Bazarov wrote:

template <typename CompT>
class Test
{
CompT m_comparator;
public:
Test(CompT cmpIn) : m_comparator(cm pIn) {}
void doThis(char a, char b) { if (m_comparator(a , b)) cout << "WIN"; }
};
bool testFunction(ch ar a, char b)
{
return a < b;
}

You can always make your 'Test' class take a functor but to use, say,
functions with it you'd have to provide a separate object.

It works as is, but you have to get the type of the template argument right:

Test<bool (*const)(char,c har)> wrap(testFuncti on);

The reason that the standard library templates need wrapper classes for
function pointers is to provide the nested typedefs result_type and the
various argument_types. The TR1 function adaptors don't need these
typedefs, so, like Test, they can be used with raw function pointers.
(See my article in the upcoming May issue of CUJ).

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

[Pete Becker]

Victor Bazarov wrote:

Test a = Test(myFunctor( ));
Test b = Test(function_t o_myFunctor_ada pter(myFunction ));

Oh, I see, you're solving a different problem from the one I was
solving. The original template can be instantiated with various types;
if you need a single type that can hold different types of target
objects you need TR1's template class "function":

function<bool(c har,char)> fp;
fp = TestFunctionObj ect();
fp = testFunction;

(Okay, you have to add "typedef bool result_type" to TestFunctionObj ect
to get this to compile with normal C++ compilers)

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

[Victor Bazarov]

"Pete Becker" <pe********@acm .org> wrote...

Victor Bazarov wrote:

Test a = Test(myFunctor( ));
Test b = Test(function_t o_myFunctor_ada pter(myFunction ));
Oh, I see, you're solving a different problem from the one I was solving.
The original template can be instantiated with various types; if you need
a single type that can hold different types of target objects you need
TR1's template class "function":

function<bool(c har,char)> fp;
fp = TestFunctionObj ect();
fp = testFunction;

This is neat. I didn't know that. How many compilers support this?
Is 'function' template class part of 'std'? Which header to include?
(Okay, you have to add "typedef bool result_type" to TestFunctionObj ect to
get this to compile with normal C++ compilers)

"Normal"? What do you mean? Is it already supported?

Thanks.

V