Re: [suse-programming-e] STL vector as a function parameter with default value (heres another one for you Jerry...)
11 Feb
2005
11 Feb
'05
20:39
I've never used that syntax before,
could you explain a little?
B-)
On Friday 11 February 2005 01:25 pm, Davi de Castro Reis wrote:
I'd like
something a little cleaner if possible....
I would go with two func signatures.
func() { vector<uint> a; this->func(a); }
func(vector<uint> &foo) {...}
But probably there is an even better way.
[]s
Davi de Castro Reis 
11 Feb
11 Feb
21:01
New subject: [suse-programming-e] STL vector as a function parameter with default value (heres another one for you Jerry...)
On Friday 11 February 2005 3:39 pm, Brad Bourn wrote:
I've never used that syntax before,
could you explain a little?
B-)
On Friday 11 February 2005 01:25 pm, Davi de Castro Reis wrote:
> > I'd like something a little cleaner if possible....
>
> I would go with two func signatures.
>
> func() { vector<uint> a; this->func(a); }
> func(vector<uint> &foo) {...}
I think that Davi's solution is
relatively portable. In C++, you can have
multiple signatures:
1. func() -- Empty parameter list. It simply defines the vector and then
calls the other function in the same class. Probably does not need to use
this->.
2. func(vector<uint> &foo) -- This is the function that does something with
the vector. Because you are calling by reference, I think you must have a
vector to reference. Borland may have some non-standard extensions where
GCC tends to be a crybaby sometimes.
In this case, your code would probably be more portable. You might also want
to make func() inline.
--
Jerry Feldman <gaf(a)blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
21:16
New subject: [suse-programming-e] STL vector as a function parameter with default value (heres another one for you Jerry...)
Makes sense once you explain it
I saw the {...} and thought he was using something to do with C++ capabilities
to unlimited (not really) number of paramters.
I was thinking too complicatedly.
hehehehe
duh!
simply overloading. sheesh
got it!
don't know that that is any cleaner than just having a global empty vetor
except I suppose someone could actually use it or assign some values or
something, where with the overload, it couldn't happen.
B-)
On Friday 11 February 2005 02:01 pm, Jerry Feldman wrote:
I think that Davi's solution is relatively
portable. In C++, you can have
multiple signatures:
1. func() -- Empty parameter list. It simply defines the vector and then
calls the other function in the same class. Probably does not need to use
this->.
2. func(vector<uint> &foo) -- This is the function that does something with
the vector. Because you are calling by reference, I think you must have a
vector to reference. Borland may have some non-standard extensions where
GCC tends to be a crybaby sometimes.
In this case, your code would probably be more portable. You might also
want to make func() inline.
--
Jerry Feldman <gaf(a)blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
21:33
New subject: [suse-programming-e] STL vector as a function parameter with default value (heres another one for you Jerry...)
On Friday 11 February 2005 4:16 pm, Brad Bourn wrote:
Makes sense once you explain it
I saw the {...} and thought he was using something to do with C++
capabilities to unlimited (not really) number of paramters.
I was thinking too complicatedly.
hehehehe
duh!
simply overloading. sheesh
Think simple. Most programming problems I've faced
can be simplified.
--
Jerry Feldman <gaf(a)blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
21:39
New subject: [suse-programming-e] STL vector as a function parameter with default value (heres another one for you Jerry...)
good'ol KISS!
hehehe
B-)
On Friday 11 February 2005 02:33 pm, Jerry Feldman wrote:
On Friday 11 February 2005 4:16 pm, Brad Bourn wrote:
Makes sense once you explain it
I saw the {...} and thought he was using something to do with C++
capabilities to unlimited (not really) number of paramters.
I was thinking too complicatedly.
hehehehe
duh!
simply overloading. sheesh
Think simple. Most programming problems I've faced can be simplified.
--
Jerry Feldman <gaf(a)blu.org>
Boston Linux and Unix user group
http://www.blu.org PGP key id:C5061EA9
PGP Key fingerprint:053C 73EC 3AC1 5C44 3E14 9245 FB00 3ED5 C506 1EA9
6140
days inactive
6140
days old
programming@lists.opensuse.org
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Brad Bourn -
Jerry Feldman