Array initializer in C++

[Wu]

Hi there,

I was wondering whether there is a way to use array initializer syntax to
initialize a non-static array member in a class in C++. In particular, if
I have a class Foo:

class Foo {
double arr[2];
}

How can I use C-like array intializer syntax:

double arr[2] = {1,2}

for the class?

Any help is appreciated.

--Peter

[mlimber]

Wu wrote:

Hi there,

I was wondering whether there is a way to use array initializer syntax to
initialize a non-static array member in a class in C++. In particular, if
I have a class Foo:

class Foo {
double arr[2];
}

How can I use C-like array intializer syntax:

double arr[2] = {1,2}

for the class?

Any help is appreciated.

--Peter

You cannot use that syntax with non-static members unless the data is
public and there are no constructors. Of course, constructors are to be
preferred (cf. http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ctors.html). Also,
arrays are evil
(http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...html#faq-34.1). See
this post for two similar methods for initializing std::vectors
instead:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....fe5982913d4414

Cheers! --M

[Wu]

Then basically I cannot have a non-static const array member in a class in C++? For example,

class Foo {
const double arr[2];
}

A 'const' array has to be intialized using initializer and a 'const'
non-static member requires a class to have a constructor. And then with
the information you gave, you really cannot have a non-static const
array member in a class in C++.

Is this right? Thanks!

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, mlimber wrote:

Wu wrote:

Hi there,

I was wondering whether there is a way to use array initializer syntax to
initialize a non-static array member in a class in C++. In particular, if
I have a class Foo:

class Foo {
double arr[2];
}

How can I use C-like array intializer syntax:

double arr[2] = {1,2}

for the class?

Any help is appreciated.

--Peter

You cannot use that syntax with non-static members unless the data is
public and there are no constructors. Of course, constructors are to be
preferred (cf. http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ctors.html). Also,
arrays are evil
(http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...html#faq-34.1). See
this post for two similar methods for initializing std::vectors
instead:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....fe5982913d4414

Cheers! --M

[mlimber]

Wu wrote:

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, mlimber wrote:

Wu wrote:

Hi there,

I was wondering whether there is a way to use array initializer syntax to
initialize a non-static array member in a class in C++. In particular, if
I have a class Foo:

class Foo {
double arr[2];
}

How can I use C-like array intializer syntax:

double arr[2] = {1,2}

for the class?

Any help is appreciated.

--Peter

You cannot use that syntax with non-static members unless the data is
public and there are no constructors. Of course, constructors are to be
preferred (cf. http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ctors.html). Also,
arrays are evil
(http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...html#faq-34.1). See
this post for two similar methods for initializing std::vectors
instead:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....fe5982913d4414

Cheers! --M

Then basically I cannot have a non-static const array member in a class in C++? For example,

class Foo {
const double arr[2];
}

A 'const' array has to be intialized using initializer and a 'const'
non-static member requires a class to have a constructor. And then with
the information you gave, you really cannot have a non-static const
array member in a class in C++.

Is this right? Thanks!

Please put your response below the text you are responding to.
Top-posting is considered impolite. (I fixed it here.)

You are correct that you cannot do that innately. You could, however,
get around the limitation by using a const std::vector as in my
previously cited post or by using a boost::scoped_array and the
appropriate initializer like that given in the previously cited post.

Cheers! --M

[Victor Bazarov]

Wu wrote:

Then basically I cannot have a non-static const array member in a class in C++? For example,

class Foo {
const double arr[2];
}

A 'const' array has to be intialized using initializer and a 'const'
non-static member requires a class to have a constructor. And then with
the information you gave, you really cannot have a non-static const
array member in a class in C++.

Is this right?

(a) Don't top-post.

(b) Yes, this is right.

V

[Wu]

mlimber wrote:

Wu wrote:

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005, mlimber wrote:

Wu wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I was wondering whether there is a way to use array initializer syntax to
> initialize a non-static array member in a class in C++. In particular, if
> I have a class Foo:
>
> class Foo {
> double arr[2];
> }
>
> How can I use C-like array intializer syntax:
>
> double arr[2] = {1,2}
>
> for the class?
>
> Any help is appreciated.
>
> --Peter

You cannot use that syntax with non-static members unless the data is
public and there are no constructors. Of course, constructors are to be
preferred (cf. http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/ctors.html). Also,
arrays are evil
(http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...html#faq-34.1). See
this post for two similar methods for initializing std::vectors
instead:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp....fe5982913d4414

Cheers! --M

Then basically I cannot have a non-static const array member in a class in C++? For example,

class Foo {
const double arr[2];
}

A 'const' array has to be intialized using initializer and a 'const'
non-static member requires a class to have a constructor. And then with
the information you gave, you really cannot have a non-static const
array member in a class in C++.

Is this right? Thanks!

Please put your response below the text you are responding to.
Top-posting is considered impolite. (I fixed it here.)

You are correct that you cannot do that innately. You could, however,
get around the limitation by using a const std::vector as in my
previously cited post or by using a boost::scoped_array and the
appropriate initializer like that given in the previously cited post.

Cheers! --M

Hi mlimber, Victor and all,

Sorry for the top-posting. I didn't mean it (I am new to newsgroup, so I
didn't know this convention).

Thanks a lot for your quick responses!

--Peter