Templating classes

[MathStuf]

I am working on a class that will be a matrix based on a vector of
vectors. I am having trouble with the following code causing errors on
compilation:

template<class Tclass MatrixBase
{
public:
MatrixBase()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;
matrix.clear();
}
MatrixBase(cons t unsigned w, const unsigned h, const T &d = T())
{
matrix.resize(w , std::vector<T>( h, d));
width = w;
height = h;
}

void AddRow(const T &d = T())
{
for (std::vector<T> ::iterator i = matrix.begin(); i !=
matrix.end(); ++i)
i->push_back(d) ;
++height;
}
// More methods
protected:
std::vector< std::vector<T matrix;
unsigned height;
unsigned width;
};

In the AddRow method (and other, similar methods as well), it says
that it needs an ';' before i and that it's undeclared. It also says
that 'height' and 'width' are undeclared. Should I move the variable
definitions up to the top of the class or should the methods be
outside of it entirely?

[Victor Bazarov]

MathStuf wrote:

I am working on a class that will be a matrix based on a vector of
vectors. I am having trouble with the following code causing errors on
compilation:

template<class Tclass MatrixBase
{
public:
MatrixBase()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;

Those are better initialised.

matrix.clear();

No need to clear a freshly constructed vector.

}
MatrixBase(cons t unsigned w, const unsigned h, const T &d = T())
{
matrix.resize(w , std::vector<T>( h, d));
width = w;
height = h;

Again, those are better initialised than assigned.

}

void AddRow(const T &d = T())
{
for (std::vector<T> ::iterator i = matrix.begin(); i !=

'matrix.begin() ' returns 'std::vector<st d::vector<T::it erator.
You probably want to make this loop nested.

Also, 'std::vector<T> ::iterator' is a dependent name. The compiler
doesn't know that it can be used where a type is expected. You need
to tell the compiler to trust you:

for (typename std::vector<T>: :iterator ...
^^^^^^^^

matrix.end(); ++i)
i->push_back(d) ;

If you don't make this loop nested (which is fine), you might want
to review what you're pushing.

++height;
}
// More methods
protected:
std::vector< std::vector<T matrix;
unsigned height;
unsigned width;
};

In the AddRow method (and other, similar methods as well), it says
that it needs an ';' before i and that it's undeclared.

That's because it doesn't believe that 'std::vector<T> ::iterator' is
in fact a type. Use 'typename' to tell it.

It also says
that 'height' and 'width' are undeclared.

Where?

Should I move the variable
definitions up to the top of the class or should the methods be
outside of it entirely?

Not sure what you're asking here, sorry.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[MathStuf]

On Jun 1, 4:39 pm, "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abaza...@com Acast.netwrote:

MathStuf wrote:

I am working on a class that will be a matrix based on a vector of
vectors. I am having trouble with the following code causing errors on
compilation:

template<class Tclass MatrixBase
{
public:
MatrixBase()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;

Those are better initialised.

matrix.clear();

No need to clear a freshly constructed vector.

}
MatrixBase(cons t unsigned w, const unsigned h, const T &d = T())
{
matrix.resize(w , std::vector<T>( h, d));
width = w;
height = h;

Again, those are better initialised than assigned.

Ah, thanks.

That's because it doesn't believe that 'std::vector<T> ::iterator' is
in fact a type. Use 'typename' to tell it.

It also says
that 'height' and 'width' are undeclared.

Where?

Hmm...guess I should have looked exactly where it was getting mixed up
there. It's in the following code:
template<class Tclass Matrix : public MatrixBase<T>
{
public:
Matrix()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;
matrix.clear();
}
// More methods
};

Since matrix, height, and width are protected, shouldn't they be
available to any class which inherits MatrixBase and invisible to
external interfaces? Or do I have it backwards?

Should I move the variable
definitions up to the top of the class or should the methods be
outside of it entirely?

Not sure what you're asking here, sorry.

I thought that the problem may have been matrix being defined after
the methods. It's a moot point now, since the typename fixed it.

[red floyd]

MathStuf wrote:

>[redacted]

Hmm...guess I should have looked exactly where it was getting mixed up
there. It's in the following code:
template<class Tclass Matrix : public MatrixBase<T>
{
public:
Matrix()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;
matrix.clear();
}
// More methods
};

Since matrix, height, and width are protected, shouldn't they be
available to any class which inherits MatrixBase and invisible to
external interfaces? Or do I have it backwards?

I *THINK* this is one of the rare cases where you need to qualify the
member, i.e. either MatrixBase<T>:: width, or this->width.

[red floyd]

MathStuf wrote:
[redacted]

>
Hmm...guess I should have looked exactly where it was getting mixed up
there. It's in the following code:
template<class Tclass Matrix : public MatrixBase<T>
{
public:
Matrix()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;
matrix.clear();
}
// More methods
};

Note that since width and height are members of MatrixBase<>, it's
probably better to let MatrixBase set them. If you need something other
than what MatrixBase has set as the "default", MatrixBase should have a
constructor with width and height parameters.

[MathStuf]

On Jun 1, 5:11 pm, red floyd <no.s...@here.d udewrote:

MathStuf wrote:

[redacted]

Hmm...guess I should have looked exactly where it was getting mixed up
there. It's in the following code:

template<class Tclass Matrix : public MatrixBase<T>
{
public:
Matrix()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;
matrix.clear();
}
// More methods
};

Note that since width and height are members of MatrixBase<>, it's
probably better to let MatrixBase set them. If you need something other
than what MatrixBase has set as the "default", MatrixBase should have a
constructor with width and height parameters.

Alright, but I still have problems with their availability. I have
GetWidth() and GetHeight() methods in MatrixBase<>, but when i go to
call it, the compiler complains about it.

\Matrix.h:161: error: there are no arguments to `GetHeight' that
depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of `GetHeight' must
be available

I'm confused since MatrixBase<Tis inherited as public, and protected
members should be available (as well as public ones such as
GetHeight() and GetWidth()). I have other classes (non-template
though) where an id is inherited from the base class (public
inheritance of a protected variable) and straight calls to the id
works. Do templates mess with inheritance at all? I don't think they
would, but that's what it would seem is happening here.

[Victor Bazarov]

MathStuf wrote:

On Jun 1, 5:11 pm, red floyd <no.s...@here.d udewrote:

>MathStuf wrote:

[redacted]

>>Hmm...guess I should have looked exactly where it was getting mixed
up there. It's in the following code:

>>template<clas s Tclass Matrix : public MatrixBase<T>
{
public:
Matrix()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;
matrix.clear();
}
// More methods
};

Note that since width and height are members of MatrixBase<>, it's
probably better to let MatrixBase set them. If you need something
other than what MatrixBase has set as the "default", MatrixBase
should have a constructor with width and height parameters.

Alright, but I still have problems with their availability. I have
GetWidth() and GetHeight() methods in MatrixBase<>, but when i go to
call it, the compiler complains about it.

\Matrix.h:161: error: there are no arguments to `GetHeight' that
depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of `GetHeight' must
be available

That's just not true. 'GetHeight' is non-static, so it *does* have
one argument that depends on the template argument - the instance of
the class (the object). But it doesn't really matter. The full name
of 'GetHeight' is 'MatrixBase<T>: :GetHeight', which means it *does*
depend on 'T' (simply because it is a member of the template).

I'm confused since MatrixBase<Tis inherited as public, and protected
members should be available (as well as public ones such as
GetHeight() and GetWidth()). I have other classes (non-template
though)

That's *the* difference.

where an id is inherited from the base class (public
inheritance of a protected variable) and straight calls to the id
works. Do templates mess with inheritance at all?

No, but they do have slightly different rules for name lookup.

I don't think they
would, but that's what it would seem is happening here.

No, you just need to learn name lookup rules.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[MathStuf]

On Jun 1, 5:46 pm, "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abaza...@com Acast.netwrote:

MathStuf wrote:

On Jun 1, 5:11 pm, red floyd <no.s...@here.d udewrote:

MathStuf wrote:

[redacted]

>Hmm...guess I should have looked exactly where it was getting mixed
up there. It's in the following code:

>template<cla ss Tclass Matrix : public MatrixBase<T>
{
public:
Matrix()
{
width = 0;
height = 0;
matrix.clear();
}
// More methods
};

Note that since width and height are members of MatrixBase<>, it's
probably better to let MatrixBase set them. If you need something
other than what MatrixBase has set as the "default", MatrixBase
should have a constructor with width and height parameters.

Alright, but I still have problems with their availability. I have
GetWidth() and GetHeight() methods in MatrixBase<>, but when i go to
call it, the compiler complains about it.

\Matrix.h:161: error: there are no arguments to `GetHeight' that
depend on a template parameter, so a declaration of `GetHeight' must
be available

That's just not true. 'GetHeight' is non-static, so it *does* have
one argument that depends on the template argument - the instance of
the class (the object). But it doesn't really matter. The full name
of 'GetHeight' is 'MatrixBase<T>: :GetHeight', which means it *does*
depend on 'T' (simply because it is a member of the template).

Okay...I put MatrixBase<T>:: scoping on all references to height,
width, and matrix, and it seems to work fine now. Thanks for all the
help.

--MathStuf

[David C.]

>

Also, 'std::vector<T> ::iterator' is a dependent name. The compiler
doesn't know that it can be used where a type is expected. You need
to tell the compiler to trust you:

for (typename std::vector<T>: :iterator ...
^^^^^^^^

This is one of the reasons I like to use typedefs. It makes the code
easier to read and removes ambiguities. For example

template<class Tclass MatrixBase
{
protected:
typedef std::vector<Tma trixrow_t;
typedef std::vector<mat rixrow_tmatrix_ t;

matrix_t matrix;
...

public:
void AddRow(const T &d = T())
{
for(matrix_t::i terator i = matrix.begin();
i != matrix.end(); ++i)
{
i->push_back(d) ;
}
++height;
}
...
};

Doing this would also make another error in the OP's code more obvious:

>template<cla ss Tclass MatrixBase
{
public:
...
void AddRow(const T &d = T())
{
for (std::vector<T> ::iterator i = matrix.begin(); i !=
matrix.end() ; ++i)
i->push_back(d) ;
++height;
}
// More methods
protected:
std::vector< std::vector<T matrix;
unsigned height;
unsigned width;
};

matrix.begin() returns an iterator to a std::vector< std::vector<T,
not an iterator to a std::vector<T>.

Using typedefs, you'd probably notice that bug without ever even running
it through the compiler.

-- David

[Victor Bazarov]

David C. wrote:

>Also, 'std::vector<T> ::iterator' is a dependent name. The compiler
doesn't know that it can be used where a type is expected. You need
to tell the compiler to trust you:

for (typename std::vector<T>: :iterator ...
^^^^^^^^

This is one of the reasons I like to use typedefs. It makes the code
easier to read and removes ambiguities. For example

template<class Tclass MatrixBase
{
protected:
typedef std::vector<Tma trixrow_t;
typedef std::vector<mat rixrow_tmatrix_ t;

matrix_t matrix;
...

public:
void AddRow(const T &d = T())
{
for(matrix_t::i terator i = matrix.begin();

I believe you still have to use 'typename':

for (typename matrix_t::itera tor i = matrix.begin();

i != matrix.end(); ++i)
{
i->push_back(d) ;
}
++height;
}
...
};

[..]

-- David

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask