|
A quick C++ language question for you experts - if I have a class X with no default destructor, and I want to declare an array of Xs as a member of class Y, how do I do it - the Xs must be initialised in the constructor initialiser list of Y:Y(), but there doesn't seem to be a way of initialising an array in a constructor initialiser list, although I've searched Stroustrup etc. and it doesn't specifically say that you can't do it, just doesn't say how.
Any offers
Dave
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
so u want to embed a class within another class and init some array in the embedded class?
just write a constructor for the embedded class that fills the array with the necessary values
"every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"
|
|
|
|
|
I want to embed an array of objects of type X in class Y. Why don't you read the question? I also don't like being called an idiot by someone who apparently can't read, and apparently can't write either.
Dave
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
You could try init your array of objects in a loop or something like this:
ClassX *MyClassXObejcts[SIZE];
for ( int x=0 ; x < = SIZE-1 ; x++ )
MyClassXObjects[x] = new ClassX( .... );
Now you will call the constructor of ClassX size-times. Within every call of the constructor you can init each ClassX own array.
Hope that is what you are looking for
Greatings Mario ///
----------------------
www.klangwerker.de
mario@klangwerker.de
----------------------
|
|
|
|
|
Yes indeed - that is actually what I have done to 'get around' the problem. But I am puzzled that I can't do what I actually want to do, which is initialise the array in the initialiser list. It isn't even possible to initialise an array of integers in the initialiser list, and this seems to me to be a 'hole' in the language definition.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
It's kind of a hole, but filling it would cause inconsistancies
class X
{
X(char* c);
};
class Y
{
Y() : ???
{}
X x[100];
}
How would we specify the initializer for all the elements in x?
x("Blah") tries to apply the constructor for X on the array itself - a type mismatch. You are also only able to initialise all the elements to the same value, which you can do with a default constructor on X anyway.
x[0]("Blah"), x[1]("Blah")... initialises each element individually, which would be pretty tedious for a very large array!
So the best solution was to not provide a mechanism for doing this and force you to workaround the problem.
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Simon, that makes sense. The main thing is you've confirmed that it can't be done, and it's not just that I couldn't find out how to do it.
I appreciate your making the point about signatures too, in your other message. Thanks.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Simon, that makes sense. The main thing is you've confirmed that it can't be done, and it's not just that I couldn't find out how to do it.
I appreciate your making the point about signatures too, in your other message. Thanks.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
hey fukwit
i didnt call you an idiot (although maybe i should have)
i read the question and tried to help ... if i misunderstood then maybe you should phrase it better
we don't get paid to answer your dumbass questions here ... if i got it wrong just say so politely
"every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"
|
|
|
|
|
I apologise. Your signature just looks like part of the message, especially when the message is relayed as e-mail, and I read it as such, and reacted just as you did to mine.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
groovy ... nuff said
no offence meant here either
lauren
"every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"
this opinion is purely mine and has no relationship to any persons living or dead
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you should use usenet ettiquette for your signature, which is to seperate the signature from the message by 3 dashes (---).
---
This is a stupid signature...
|
|
|
|
|
What would she care about anyways? The signature shows her metality!
|
|
|
|
|
And your anonymous post speaks volumes about yours.
I think it's *damn* funny, but then, I have a sense of humour.
Christian
The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
|
|
|
|
|
And your anonymous post speaks volumes about yours.
Yes! But not a bad one at all! 
I think it's *damn* funny, but then, I have a sense of humour.
Again, Yes! You're right!
One thing though, why would she reply on any issue she got no clues?
Look at all the replies she posts, it is almost every where on every question? Nothing but just a reply! 
|
|
|
|
|
my final comment on this thread ... true on some issues i have no definitive answer but i post a reply for 3 main reasons:
1). if a thread goes unanswered for a while it seems to get ignored
2). so the poster knows there are people out here who are reading what they post
3). i usually have a clue as to how to solve the issue in one way ... it might not be the best way but it would usually work ... if others can correct me or answer more precisely so much the better ... if not then at least the poster can get a start on maybe a fresh way of thinking ... i always think that some lead is better than none
as for your seemingly personal comments ... you have no idea about me or who i am so please refrain from guessing and concluding derogatory things from your guesses
fyi i have been coding for 20 years and can write in most languages on most os's ... when you have as much experience maybe you'll understand that advice does not always have to relate to the minutae of exact technologies
i would comment on how many times you try to help others but as you post anonymously i can't tell
---
"every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"
|
|
|
|
|
<fyi i="" have="" been="" coding="" for="" 20="" years="" and="" can="" write="" in="" most="" languages="" on="" os's="" ...="" when="" you="" as="" much="" experience="" maybe="" you'll="" understand="" that="" advice="" does="" not="" always="" to="" relate="" the="" minutae="" of="" exact="" technologies<="">
Oh Ya! Then post fixing replies please! An idea would be: Post sample or code fragments to fix.
well true ... on some issues i have no definitive answer
Rest assured you'd be appreciated much more than what you think you would rather than get flamed for usuall unwanted posts, as you already admitted!
your seemingly personal comments ... you have no idea about me
No! Absloutely Nothing Personal Please! Just felt like letting you know my opinion and that I feel you respect opinions as you demanded respect for yours!
In closing:
Usually most developers here have some sort of a website that they put the things they have done on it to show what kind of experts they are while your's is just a personal photo album! A little code contribution won't hurt any one for sure.
Codeproject is for suppporting/promoting/passing around codes,
where is yours so far? Not even in your posts!
Happy coding and do please enjoy your contributions to the society you love.
|
|
|
|
|
Codeproject is for suppporting/promoting/passing around codes,
where is yours so far? Not even in your posts!
No, The Code Project is not a place for you to come to find code that you can't produce yourself (which is what you've shown you think it is for with your various replies). The Code Project is (as the page header states) "By developers, for developers". It is a community site, where people go - yes to share code - but also to chat with other developers and try to help each other. The Code Project is about learning.
Lauren has done exactly that, and for that we should all be thankful. Many times in my questions people have replied with "well, im not sure if this will work, but you could try something like this..." which has pointed me in the right direction and enabled me to solve my problem on my own - THAT is what the Code Project is about. Regardless of what anyone tells you, you can never find code (even on a site like this) that does exactly what you want. And unless you wrote it to start with it is very difficult to modify it effectively. Even if you could, it would be on no real use to you in the long run. I guess this is where that quote from Jurassic Park comes in (modified): "You have no respect for it as you stood on the shoulders of geniuses, and you did not acquire the knowledge yourself" - OK, crap quote but you should get the idea im trying to portray here:
The Code Project 'community' provides the most help to you by sharing ideas, not solutions. Again, The Code Project is about learning. You can only learn through your own discovery, not through others. Just like you can't learn to drive a car by watching others.
|
|
|
|
|
No, The Code Project is not a place for you to come to find code that you can't produce yourself (which is what you've shown you think it is for with your various replies). The Code Project is (as the page header states) "By developers, for developers". It is a community site, where people go - yes to share code - but also to chat with other developers and try to help each other. The Code Project is about learning.
Yes and I did not argue on that any bit? In fact I tried letting her know that!
BUT:
David, First of all be sure that your *any* contribution even if it would be as little as one code line to solve someones problem is gonna be not only appreciated but gold plated! And second, you are the last
person I'd have thought of posting such a reply! Let me point you to your own contributions and your comments in the accompanied articles.
(Keep in mind that I am one of the 5 point voters on these and very much appreciated and learnt from them.)
In the:
Office 2000 style File Dialogs for Win 95/98/NT/Me
By David Wulff
Download demo project with sizing support*- Email me to get this zip file
* This is still being tested (and does not work properly). Please see if you can get it working, as I am having problems.
Credits
Original code by Norm Almond
Also in:
Office 2000 Style Html Help Viewer
By David Wulff
Credits
All these people wrote code that has been used in this program:
Jeffrey Richter (CAppBar), Davide Calabro (CButtonST), KeyWorks Software (CHHCtrl), PJ Naughter (HKLM), and whoever wrote the SAPrefsStatic class (Smaller Animals?). Thank you to all of you.
Which one have you fully done INDEPENDENTLY yourself?
So here again, it does not matter how big or small, just post the related reply, nothing ZIGZAG is what I mean!
NOTE: This is not FLAME post, please take it easy.
|
|
|
|
|
*sigh*
if you had taken the time to read all of my posts you would find i helped a few people ... maybe more than a few ... and i don't remember pissing anybody off ... if i could be bothered i would point you at them but seeing as this kind of discussion is definately NOT THE POINT OF THIS SITE i won't
please get a life and do something useful with the air you breathe
oh yah ... this isnt a flame either so take it cool, as you say
---
"every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"
|
|
|
|
|
Which one have you fully done INDEPENDENTLY yourself? So here again, it does not matter how big or small, just post the related reply, nothing ZIGZAG is what I mean!
But the point is not what I have done. I do not always follow the rules, I do not always do things the way I should. I didn't say that 'I' didn't use code from this site, but rather that I’d learnt far more from finding out for myself than I did by reading through others’ code. And If you’ve read through the code with those articles, you will find I have modified large sections of the code I didn’t originally write, which I had to do to understand what was going on. This is even the case with my own code, when I look back on code I wrote 16 months ago, I generally have a hard time figuring out “Why did I do this like that?”.
And those ‘projects’ in themselves were purely learning examples for me anyway. The feedback I’ve received from the readers of the articles has enabled me to improve the code to a level not possible otherwise.
NOTE: This is not FLAME post, please take it easy
I didn’t take it as one.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, for all we know your website has pictures of your pet goat, as you don't even have the courage to put your name to your posts. I don't know who does and does not have a web site, ( I certainly don't ), but I think that irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. If people offer help, then they offer help. The quality of their help speaks for itself, and I don't think I've seen lauren give bad advice yet ( and I read most of the C++ column, to offer advice and see what advice is offered ).
>> Rest assured you'd be appreciated much more than what you think you would rather than get flamed for usuall unwanted posts, as you already admitted!
What the hell does this mean ?
Christian
The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
|
|
|
|
|
Two comments:
1/ I nearly replied to the anonymous post you're replying this morning, but did not only in the hope it would be the end of it. I log in tonight and it seems to have become a major issue. I second lauren on this: enough already !! Help was offered, a sig was misunderstood, the parties involved have sorted it out, why the hel are we talking about this still ?
2/ I'm glad to see you've kept the sig
Christian
The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
|
|
|
|
|
you're right
i shouldn't have taken the bait
end of thread
---
"every year we invent better idiot proof systems and every year they invent better idiots"
|
|
|
|
|
Dave, I presume from the fact your name appears twice in this post that you know what a sig block is. Please note that the comment regarding recursion in this post is not directed at you, and that anyone who remotely uses this site knows ( and I presume smiles when they see ) lauren's sig block.
You might also want to wake up to the fact that unless you're speaking to your employees, and they are poor enough at their job to put up with it, that speaking to people as you have done is not a way to encourage them to offer you advice. If you spoke to me like that, I'd be keen to pursue what I like to call the 'get stuffed' option next time I saw you post a question.
I hope we've all learned something. Advice given here is free. Appreciate it, and consider if you get the wrong answer, you may have asked the question wrong. Either way, if people try to help, then they have done you a favour for free - they have not given you anything that is due to you.
Christian
The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda.
To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
