The c++ way?

[JustSomeGuy]

I have a data structure that contains a buffer of character of lenght n.

The buffer in this case contains a string that is not null terminated.

at the moment to get a null terminated buffer I'm doing the following:

strncpy(buf, (const char *)data, n);
buf[n] = '\0';
string x(buf);

Surely there must be a better way to initialze the string x...

By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

[Alf P. Steinbach]

* JustSomeGuy:

I have a data structure that contains a buffer of character of lenght n.

The buffer in this case contains a string that is not null terminated.

at the moment to get a null terminated buffer I'm doing the following:

strncpy(buf, (const char *)data, n);
buf[n] = '\0';
string x(buf);

Surely there must be a better way to initialze the string x...

Off the cuff,

string x( data, data+n );

By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

Not in the language or its standard library, but there is something like
it in the Boost library.

However, if you're smart you'll register for a mindwipe for the VB parts
of your brain -- it's not a good idea to adopt such practices in C++.

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is it such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

[JKop]

JustSomeGuy posted:

By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

Here is how the Variant type in VB works:
class Variant
{
private:

enum
{
intE,
charE,
doubleE
} current_type;

union
{
int intD;
char charD;
double doubleD;
} data;

public:
//Assignment operator goes here, as well as other operators
};

As you can see, Variant's are slow, and waste more memory. It's a lose-lose
situation, but then again if you're one of those "Visual Basic, Dumb it
Down" people, you may take a shine to it!
-JKop

[Phlip]

JustSomeGuy wrote:

I have a data structure that contains a buffer of character of lenght n.

The buffer in this case contains a string that is not null terminated.

at the moment to get a null terminated buffer I'm doing the following:

strncpy(buf, (const char *)data, n);
buf[n] = '\0';
string x(buf);

Surely there must be a better way to initialze the string x...
Yes. You put the above into a method of your data structure, and always call
that function when you need the string. Then, if the string representation
ever changes, you only have one place to upgrade.

But there might be a way using std::copy or similar. Others will reply about
that.
By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

Yes. MS renamed VB's plugin layer "COM", and published the Variant as the
low-level type VARIANT. In C++ the high level type _variant_t wraps that.

For a portable solution, go to www.boost.org and look at boost::any.

--
Phlip
http://industrialxp.org/community/bi...UserInterfaces

[Phlip]

Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

Not in the language or its standard library, but there is something like
it in the Boost library.

However, if you're smart you'll register for a mindwipe for the VB parts
of your brain -- it's not a good idea to adopt such practices in C++.

Except when you occassionally need the Variable State Pattern from
/Smalltalk Best Practice Patterns/...

--
Phlip
http://industrialxp.org/community/bi...UserInterfaces

[Kevin Saff]

"JustSomeGuy" <No***@ucalgary.ca> wrote in message
news:40***************@ucalgary.ca...

I have a data structure that contains a buffer of character of lenght n.

The buffer in this case contains a string that is not null terminated.

at the moment to get a null terminated buffer I'm doing the following:

strncpy(buf, (const char *)data, n);
buf[n] = '\0';
string x(buf);

Surely there must be a better way to initialze the string x...
This works:

std::string x (data, n);

It constructs the string from the first n chars in data.
By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

There are different ideas of what a variant should do. Boost
http://www.boost.org has a couple different implementations, but they don't
act like VB's. Since you can overload operators, it might not be too much
trouble to make one, depending on what exactly you need.

HTH
--
+---- Kevin C. Saff ----+ F-15 | |Eagle
| Engineer, Boeing, StL | _____|_^_|_____
| Tracking/Fleet Support| * + [_(x)_] + *

[JustSomeGuy]

JKop wrote:

JustSomeGuy posted:

By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

Here is how the Variant type in VB works:

class Variant
{
private:

enum
{
intE,
charE,
doubleE
} current_type;

union
{
int intD;
char charD;
double doubleD;
} data;

public:
//Assignment operator goes here, as well as other operators
};

As you can see, Variant's are slow, and waste more memory. It's a lose-lose
situation, but then again if you're one of those "Visual Basic, Dumb it
Down" people, you may take a shine to it!

-JKop

Of course!
A question though....

In the public section I guess I can't add these...

int Get(void);
char Get(void);
double Get(void);

because the return type is not considered to be part of the signature...
I guess however that I could do...

void Get(int &x)
void Get(char &x)
void Get(double &x)
But i think you are talking about operator= is that right?

[Alan Johnson]

JKop wrote:

JustSomeGuy posted:

By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
Visual Basic?

Here is how the Variant type in VB works:
class Variant
{
private:

enum
{
intE,
charE,
doubleE
} current_type;

union
{
int intD;
char charD;
double doubleD;
} data;

public:
//Assignment operator goes here, as well as other operators
};

As you can see, Variant's are slow, and waste more memory. It's a lose-lose
situation, but then again if you're one of those "Visual Basic, Dumb it
Down" people, you may take a shine to it!
-JKop

Semi-OT:
That captures the basic idea, though the VARIANT structure from COM
Automation (which, unless I misunderstand, is the same thing VB uses for
a Variant), is actually quite a bit more complex. See link for details:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...chap6_7zdz.asp

Alan

[JKop]

JustSomeGuy posted:

JKop wrote:

JustSomeGuy posted:

> By the way is there such a thing as a Variant in C++ as there is in
> Visual Basic?

Here is how the Variant type in VB works:

class Variant
{
private:

enum
{
intE,
charE,
doubleE
} current_type;

union
{
int intD;
char charD;
double doubleD;
} data;

public:
//Assignment operator goes here, as well as other operators
};

As you can see, Variant's are slow, and waste more memory. It's a
lose-lose situation, but then again if you're one of those "Visual
Basic, Dumb it Down" people, you may take a shine to it!

-JKop

Of course!
A question though....

In the public section I guess I can't add these...

int Get(void);
char Get(void);
double Get(void);

because the return type is not considered to be part of the
signature... I guess however that I could do...

void Get(int &x)
void Get(char &x)
void Get(double &x)
But i think you are talking about operator= is that right?

In the above, you are using an actual member function to get the data.
Consider the following function:
void TakeNumber(int in_number);
Here's how *your* idea would work:

int main(void)
{
Variant j;

// ...

TakeNumber( j.GetInt() );

//or something like that

}
What I had in mind was actually declaring a "cast operator", so that you
could simply do the following:
int main(void)
{
Variant j;

// ...

TakeNumber(j);

TakeCharachter(j);

TakeDouble(j);
}
The cast operator would be defined as so:
Variant::operator int(void)
{
if (current_type == intE)
{
return data.intD;
}
else
{
throw "poo!";
}
}

Variant::operator double(void)
{
if (current_type == doubleE)
{
return data.doubleD;
}
else
{
throw "poo!";
}
}
Or something along those lines!
-JKop

[JustSomeGuy]

Thank you.
Thats great...but throw("poo!");
rotflmao