Forward reference compiler error...

[barcaroller]

Why does the following code cause a compiler error?
class A; // forward reference

class B
{
foo()
{
a = new A;

cout << a->bar(); // compiler error here
}

A* a;
}

class A
{
int bar()
{
return 1;
}
}
The compiler error I get is (note the use of 'struct' not 'class'):

error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct A'
error: forward declaration of 'struct A'
When I place the class B definition after class A, the error goes away. I
thought it was okay to use a "pointer" to an object of a forward-referenced
class.

[Pete Becker]

On 2008-05-03 10:03:33 -0400, "barcarolle r" <ba*********@mu sic.netsaid:

>
Why does the following code cause a compiler error?
class A; // forward reference

class B
{
foo()
{
a = new A;

cout << a->bar(); // compiler error here
}

A* a;
}

class A
{
int bar()
{
return 1;
}
}
The compiler error I get is (note the use of 'struct' not 'class'):

error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct A'
error: forward declaration of 'struct A'
When I place the class B definition after class A, the error goes away. I
thought it was okay to use a "pointer" to an object of a forward-referenced
class.

At the point of "new A" the compiler has to generate code to create an
object of tpye A. Since it hasn't seen the definition of A, it can't do
that.

--
Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com) Author of "The
Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and Reference
(www.petebecker.com/tr1book)

[barcaroller]

"Pete Becker" <pe**@versatile coding.comwrote in message
news:2008050310 124475249-pete@versatilec odingcom...

>
At the point of "new A" the compiler has to generate code to create an
object of tpye A. Since it hasn't seen the definition of A, it can't do
that.

Thank you for your response. Actually, it's not the new() that is causing
me problems. Let me present the problem in another way.
class A; // forward reference

class B
{
int print()
{

}

foo(A* a)
{
cout << a->print(); // compiler error here
}
}

class A
{
int print()
{

}

bar(B* b)
{
cout << b->print();
}
}

main()
{
a = new A;
b = new B;

b->foo(a);
a->bar(b);
}
Basically, I have two objects that are dependent on each other. I thought I
would be okay as long as I use pointers to these objects. Is there a way
around this problem (other than re-designing)?

[Pete Becker]

On 2008-05-03 10:36:50 -0400, "barcarolle r" <ba*********@mu sic.netsaid:

>
"Pete Becker" <pe**@versatile coding.comwrote in message
news:2008050310 124475249-pete@versatilec odingcom...

>>
At the point of "new A" the compiler has to generate code to create an
object of tpye A. Since it hasn't seen the definition of A, it can't do
that.

Thank you for your response. Actually, it's not the new() that is causing
me problems. Let me present the problem in another way.
class A; // forward reference

class B
{
int print()
{

}

foo(A* a)
{
cout << a->print(); // compiler error here
}
}

At the point of the call to a->print() the compiler has to generate
code to call a member function of an object of type A. Since it hasn't
seen the definition of A, it can't do that.

>
Basically, I have two objects that are dependent on each other. I thought I
would be okay as long as I use pointers to these objects. Is there a way
around this problem (other than re-designing)?

Yup. Move the definition of B::foo outside the class definition, after
the definition of A.

--
Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com) Author of "The
Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and Reference
(www.petebecker.com/tr1book)

[Jerry Coffin]

In article <fv**********@a ioe.org>, ba*********@mus ic.net says...

Why does the following code cause a compiler error?
class A; // forward reference

class B
{
foo()
{
a = new A;

cout << a->bar(); // compiler error here
}

A* a;
}

class A
{
int bar()
{
return 1;
}
}

Because when you declare (but don't define) the class, it's an
incomplete type. You can create a pointer (or reference) to that type,
but anything that involves _dereferencing_ the pointer (among other
things) needs a _definition_ of the class.

For the compiler to handle something like 'a->b()', it has to have seen
declarations for both 'a' and 'b'. Using a reference would be the same
-- for you to use something like 'x.y()', it has to have seen
declarations of both 'x' and 'y'.

--
Later,
Jerry.

The universe is a figment of its own imagination.

[Andrey Tarasevich]

barcaroller wrote:

>
When I place the class B definition after class A, the error goes away. I
thought it was okay to use a "pointer" to an object of a forward-referenced
class.

Use? No. It is OK to _declare/define_ a pointer to a forward-declared class. And
it is OK to _use_ that pointer in a number of very very limited ways. "Limited
ways" in this case means that it is not OK to apply a member access operators
('->' in your example) to this pointer, and it is not OK create object of that
forward-declared incomplete type using 'new'.

Move the definitions of the offending inline members to a point _after_ the
definition of class A, and the problem will go away.

--
Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich

[Jim Langston]

barcaroller wrote:

"Pete Becker" <pe**@versatile coding.comwrote in message
news:2008050310 124475249-pete@versatilec odingcom...

>>
At the point of "new A" the compiler has to generate code to create
an object of tpye A. Since it hasn't seen the definition of A, it
can't do that.

Thank you for your response. Actually, it's not the new() that is
causing me problems. Let me present the problem in another way.
class A; // forward reference

class B
{
int print()
{

}

foo(A* a)
{
cout << a->print(); // compiler error here
}
}

class A
{
int print()
{

}

bar(B* b)
{
cout << b->print();
}
}

main()
{
a = new A;
b = new B;

b->foo(a);
a->bar(b);
}
Basically, I have two objects that are dependent on each other. I
thought I would be okay as long as I use pointers to these objects. Is
there a way around this problem (other than re-designing)?

Ouput of program is
21

#include <iostream>

class A; // forward reference

class B
{
public:
int print()
{
return 1;
}

void foo(A* a);
};

class A
{
public:
int print()
{
return 2;
}

void bar(B* b)
{
std::cout << b->print();
}
};

void B::foo(A* a)
{
std::cout << a->print();
}

main()
{
A* a = new A;
B* b = new B;

b->foo(a);
a->bar(b);

delete a;
delete b;
}


--
Jim Langston
ta*******@rocke tmail.com