I have a problem with a cyclic dependency of two classes:
class Iref_count // Interface for the intrusive_ptr
{ friend class int_ptr_base; // for access to Count
private:
volatile unsigned Count;
protected:
Iref_count() : Count(0) {}
// You must not call the non-virtual destructor directly.
~Iref_count() {}
};
class Slice;
class Iterator
{ intrusive_ptr<S liceroot;
// some more stuff
};
class Slice : public Iref_count
{ scopec_ptr<Iter atorstart;
scopec_ptr<Iter atorstop;
// some more stuff
};
To get this to compile either scoped_ptr or intrusive_ptr have to accept
an incomplete type.
Unfortunately I did not have luck with this so far. Neither Slice nor
Iterator are PODs. And the forward declaration of Slice generates wrong
code in intrusive_ptr at the conversion from Iref_count* to Slice*. The
pointer value is not translated by the offset of Iref_count.
Note that intrusive_ptr is not boost::intrusiv e_ptr, because that won't
compile on my platform. I wrote something similar (see below). However,
I am unsure whether boost::intrusiv e_ptr would have defined behavior in
this case, and if it does so, why?
Any Ideas?
The cyclic dependency is really needed from the designs point of view.
/* Abstract non-template base class of int_ptr */
class int_ptr_base
{protected:
Iref_Count* Ptr;
public:
// Store a new object under reference count control
// or initialize a NULL pointer.
int_ptr_base(Ir ef_Count* ptr);
// Copy constructor
int_ptr_base(co nst int_ptr_base& r);
// Destructor core
Iref_Count* unassign();
// some more functions...
};
template <class T>
class int_ptr : protected int_ptr_base
{public:
// Store a new object under reference count control
// or initialize a NULL pointer.
int_ptr(T* ptr = NULL) : int_ptr_base(pt r) {}
// Destructor, frees the stored object if this is the last reference.
~int_ptr() { delete (T*)unassign(); }
// Basic operators
T* get() const { return (T*)Ptr; }
T& operator*() const { assert(Ptr); return *(T*)Ptr; }
T* operator->() const { assert(Ptr); return (T*)Ptr; }
// some more functions...
};
int_ptr_base::i nt_ptr_base(Ire f_Count* ptr)
: Ptr(ptr)
{ if (Ptr)
++Ptr->Count; // normally InterlockedInc( Ptr->Count);
}
int_ptr_base::i nt_ptr_base(con st int_ptr_base& r)
: Ptr(r.Ptr)
{ if (Ptr)
++Ptr->Count; // normally InterlockedInc( Ptr->Count);
}
Iref_Count* int_ptr_base::u nassign()
{ return Ptr && --Ptr->Count == 0 ? Ptr : NULL; // normally
InterlockedDec( Ptr->Count)
} 2 2387
Marcel Müller wrote:
I have a problem with a cyclic dependency of two classes:
class Iref_count // Interface for the intrusive_ptr
{ friend class int_ptr_base; // for access to Count
private:
volatile unsigned Count;
protected:
Iref_count() : Count(0) {}
// You must not call the non-virtual destructor directly.
~Iref_count() {}
};
class Slice;
class Iterator
{ intrusive_ptr<S liceroot;
// some more stuff
};
class Slice : public Iref_count
{ scopec_ptr<Iter atorstart;
scopec_ptr<Iter atorstop;
// some more stuff
};
To get this to compile either scoped_ptr or intrusive_ptr have to accept
an incomplete type.
Unfortunately I did not have luck with this so far. Neither Slice nor
Iterator are PODs. And the forward declaration of Slice generates wrong
code in intrusive_ptr at the conversion from Iref_count* to Slice*. The
pointer value is not translated by the offset of Iref_count.
Note that intrusive_ptr is not boost::intrusiv e_ptr, because that won't
compile on my platform. I wrote something similar (see below). However,
I am unsure whether boost::intrusiv e_ptr would have defined behavior in
this case, and if it does so, why?
It would not.
However, std::tr1::share d_ptr (and boost::shared_p tr) probably would.
>
Any Ideas?
The cyclic dependency is really needed from the designs point of view.
You might want to have a look at the implementation of boost::shared_p tr.
The key idea is to store a deleter within the shared_ptr and initialize
that one upon construction (with an appropriate default). This way, the
problem can be postponed until shared_ptr objects need to be initialized.
Only at that point, the type has to be complete.
/* Abstract non-template base class of int_ptr */
class int_ptr_base
{protected:
Iref_Count* Ptr;
public:
// Store a new object under reference count control
// or initialize a NULL pointer.
int_ptr_base(Ir ef_Count* ptr);
// Copy constructor
int_ptr_base(co nst int_ptr_base& r);
// Destructor core
Iref_Count* unassign();
// some more functions...
};
template <class T>
class int_ptr : protected int_ptr_base
{public:
// Store a new object under reference count control
// or initialize a NULL pointer.
int_ptr(T* ptr = NULL) : int_ptr_base(pt r) {}
// Destructor, frees the stored object if this is the last reference.
~int_ptr() { delete (T*)unassign(); }
The line above is either wrong or too smart: nothing (except the comment)
indicates that the reference has to be last.
// Basic operators
T* get() const { return (T*)Ptr; }
T& operator*() const { assert(Ptr); return *(T*)Ptr; }
T* operator->() const { assert(Ptr); return (T*)Ptr; }
// some more functions...
};
int_ptr_base::i nt_ptr_base(Ire f_Count* ptr)
: Ptr(ptr)
{ if (Ptr)
++Ptr->Count; // normally InterlockedInc( Ptr->Count);
}
int_ptr_base::i nt_ptr_base(con st int_ptr_base& r)
: Ptr(r.Ptr)
{ if (Ptr)
++Ptr->Count; // normally InterlockedInc( Ptr->Count);
}
Iref_Count* int_ptr_base::u nassign()
{ return Ptr && --Ptr->Count == 0 ? Ptr : NULL; // normally
InterlockedDec( Ptr->Count)
}
Best
Kai-Uwe Bux
Kai-Uwe Bux wrote:
>Note that intrusive_ptr is not boost::intrusiv e_ptr, because that won't compile on my platform. I wrote something similar (see below). However, I am unsure whether boost::intrusiv e_ptr would have defined behavior in this case, and if it does so, why?
It would not.
However, std::tr1::share d_ptr (and boost::shared_p tr) probably would.
>> Any Ideas? The cyclic dependency is really needed from the designs point of view.
You might want to have a look at the implementation of boost::shared_p tr.
The key idea is to store a deleter within the shared_ptr and initialize
that one upon construction (with an appropriate default). This way, the
problem can be postponed until shared_ptr objects need to be initialized.
Only at that point, the type has to be complete.
Hmm, I intensionally preferred intrusive pointers because of their small
memory footprint. Furthermore it is a major design change, because the
current interfaces rely on the fact that passing T* instead of
int_ptr<Tas function argument is sufficient even if int_ptr<T>
instances may be assigned from the parameter in the function body.
Maybe I can apply something like that what you have mentioned to the
scoped_ptr and forward declare the Iterator class.
>/* Abstract non-template base class of int_ptr */ class int_ptr_base {protected: Iref_Count* Ptr; public: // Store a new object under reference count control // or initialize a NULL pointer. int_ptr_base(Ir ef_Count* ptr); // Copy constructor int_ptr_base(co nst int_ptr_base& r); // Destructor core Iref_Count* unassign(); // some more functions... };
template <class T> class int_ptr : protected int_ptr_base {public: // Store a new object under reference count control // or initialize a NULL pointer. int_ptr(T* ptr = NULL) : int_ptr_base(pt r) {} // Destructor, frees the stored object if this is the last reference. ~int_ptr() { delete (T*)unassign(); }
The line above is either wrong or too smart: nothing (except the comment)
indicates that the reference has to be last.
unassign returns NULL unless it removes the last reference. Well, not
documented that nicely. The whole trick is to do anything but the
absolutely needed part in a non-template base. This keeps the binary
compact.
Marcel This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics |
by: Bolin |
last post by:
Hi all,
A question about smart pointers of constant objects. The problem is to
convert from Ptr<T> to Ptr<const T>. I have look up and seen some
answers to this question, but I guess I am too stupid to understand
and make them work.
E.g. I have read that boost's smart pointers are able to do this
convertion, but the following code doesn't compile (VC++6.0):
|
by: Eric |
last post by:
See question in main function below...TIA.
struct A {};
struct B: public A {};
#include <boost/shared_ptr.hpp>
#include <set>
typedef boost::shared_ptr<A> AP;
typedef std::set<AP> AS;
|
by: lokb |
last post by:
Hi,
I have a structure which and defined a smart pointer to the structure.
/* Structure of Begin Document Index Record */
typedef struct BDI_Struct{
unsigned char rname;
unsigned short int rlen;
int code;
short int reserved;
char indexName;
|
by: christopher diggins |
last post by:
I would like to survey how widespread the usage of smart pointers in C++
code is today. Any anecdotal experience about the frequency of usage of
smart pointer for dynamic allocation in your own code or other people's code
you have come across would be appreciated. I am also trying to identify the
likelihood nad frequency of scenarios where smart pointer solutions would
not be appropriate, i.e. for some reason such as performance or...
|
by: Axter |
last post by:
I normally use a program call Doxygen to document my source
code.(http://www.stack.nl/~dimitri/doxygen)
This method works great for small and medium size projects, and you can
get good documentation like the following:
http://axter.com/smartptr
Now I'm on a client site, and I'm trying to create the same type of
documentation on a very large project.
I ran the Doxygen program, and it ran for over 16 hours, before I had
| |
by: Ney André de Mello Zunino |
last post by:
Hello.
I have written a simple reference-counting smart pointer class template
called RefCountPtr<T>. It works in conjunction with another class,
ReferenceCountable, which is responsible for the actual counting. Here
is the latter's definition:
// --- Begin ReferenceCountable.h ----------
class ReferenceCountable
|
by: =?iso-8859-1?q?Ernesto_Basc=F3n?= |
last post by:
I am implementing my custom smart pointer:
template <typename T>
class MySmartPtr
{
public:
MySmartPtr(T* aPointer)
{
mPointer = aPointer;
}
|
by: Boris |
last post by:
I had a 3 hours meeting today with some fellow programmers that are partly
not convinced about using smart pointers in C++. Their main concern is a
possible performance impact. I've been explaining the advantages of smart
pointers endlessly (which are currently used in all our C++ software; we
use the Boost smart pointers) as I'm seriously concerned that there is a
shift to raw pointers. We are not developing system software but rather...
|
by: Juha Nieminen |
last post by:
I asked a long time ago in this group how to make a smart pointer
which works with incomplete types. I got this answer (only relevant
parts included):
//------------------------------------------------------------------
template<typename Data_t>
class SmartPointer
{
Data_t* data;
void(*deleterFunc)(Data_t*);
|
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can effortlessly switch the default language on Windows 10 without reinstalling. I'll walk you through it.
First, let's disable language synchronization. With a Microsoft account, language settings sync across devices. To prevent any complications,...
| |
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed.
This is as boiled down as I can make it.
Here is my compilation command:
g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp
Here is the code in...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows Update option using the Control Panel or Settings app; it automatically checks for updates and installs any it finds, whether you like it or not. For most users, this new feature is actually very convenient. If you want to control the update process,...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own....
Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
|
by: conductexam |
last post by:
I have .net C# application in which I am extracting data from word file and save it in database particularly. To store word all data as it is I am converting the whole word file firstly in HTML and then checking html paragraph one by one.
At the time of converting from word file to html my equations which are in the word document file was convert into image.
Globals.ThisAddIn.Application.ActiveDocument.Select();...
|
by: TSSRALBI |
last post by:
Hello
I'm a network technician in training and I need your help.
I am currently learning how to create and manage the different types of VPNs and I have a question about LAN-to-LAN VPNs.
The last exercise I practiced was to create a LAN-to-LAN VPN between two Pfsense firewalls, by using IPSEC protocols.
I succeeded, with both firewalls in the same network. But I'm wondering if it's possible to do the same thing, with 2 Pfsense firewalls...
| |
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
| |