Skip to main content

Generic container idioms

Developing generic containers in C++ can become complex if you want to develope truly generic containers (as much as they can get). Relaxing the requirements on type T is the key behind developing truly generic containers. There a few C++ idioms to actually achieve the "lowest denominator" possible with requirements on type T.

It is easy to come up with a generic stack which requires following operations defiend on type T: a default constructor, a copy constructor, a non-throwing destructor and a copy assignment operator. But thats too much!

The requirements can be reduced to the folloing list: a copy constructor and a non-throwing destructor.

To achieve this, a generic container should be able to allocate uninitialized memory and invoke constructor(s) only once on each element while "initializing" them. This is possible using following two techniques:

1. operator new:
void * mem = operator new (sizeof (T) * NUMBER_OF_ELEMENTS);

2. construct helper using placement new:
template <class T1, class T2>
void construct (T1 *p, const T2 &value) {
new (p) T1(value);
}

operator new allocates uninitialized memory. It is a fancy way of calling malloc.
The construct helper template function invokes placement new and in turn invokes a copy constructor on the initialized memory. The pointer p is supposed to be one of the uninitialized memory chunks allocated using operator new.

Moreover, pointers in the range [end, end_of_allocated_range) should not point to objects of type T, but to uninitialized memory. (end can be considered an iterator pointing at an element one past the last initialized element of the container)

When an element is removed from the container, destructot should be invoked on them. A destroy helper function can be helpful here as shown.

template <class T>
void destroy (T *p) {
p->~T();
}

Similarly, to delete a range, another overloaded destroy function which takes two iterators could be useful. It essentially invokes first destroy helper on each element in the sequence.

Please see More C++ gems for elaborate articles on this topic. (authors Hurb Sutter and Matthew H. Austern)

Comments

Sumant said…
Also see more idioms related to developing generic containers in the open content wikibook: "More C++ Idioms"

Popular posts from this blog

Multi-dimensional arrays in C++11

What new can be said about multi-dimensional arrays in C++? As it turns out, quite a bit! With the advent of C++11, we get new standard library class std::array. We also get new language features, such as template aliases and variadic templates. So I'll talk about interesting ways in which they come together.

It all started with a simple question of how to define a multi-dimensional std::array. It is a great example of deceptively simple things. Are the following the two arrays identical except that one is native and the other one is std::array?

int native[3][4];
std::array<std::array<int, 3>, 4> arr;

No! They are not. In fact, arr is more like an int[4][3]. Note the difference in the array subscripts. The native array is an array of 3 elements where every element is itself an array of 4 integers. 3 rows and 4 columns. If you want a std::array with the same layout, what you really need is:

std::array<std::array<int, 4>, 3> arr;

That's quite annoying for two r…

Covariance and Contravariance in C++ Standard Library

Covariance and Contravariance are concepts that come up often as you go deeper into generic programming. While designing a language that supports parametric polymorphism (e.g., templates in C++, generics in Java, C#), the language designer has a choice between Invariance, Covariance, and Contravariance when dealing with generic types. C++'s choice is "invariance". Let's look at an example.
struct Vehicle {}; struct Car : Vehicle {}; std::vector<Vehicle *> vehicles; std::vector<Car *> cars; vehicles = cars; // Does not compile The above program does not compile because C++ templates are invariant. Of course, each time a C++ template is instantiated, the compiler creates a brand new type that uniquely represents that instantiation. Any other type to the same template creates another unique type that has nothing to do with the earlier one. Any two unrelated user-defined types in C++ can't be assigned to each-other by default. You have to provide a c…

Inheritance vs std::variant

C++17 added std::variant and std::visit in its repertoire. They are worth a close examination. I've been wondering about whether they are always better than inheritance for modeling sum-types (fancy name for discriminated unions) and if not, under what circumstances they are not. We'll compare the two approaches in this blog post. So here it goes.

Inheritancestd::variantNeed not know all the derived types upfront (open-world assumption)Must know all the cases upfront (closed-world assumption)Dynamic Allocation (usually)No dynamic allocationIntrusive (must inherit from the base class)Non-intrusive (third-party classes can participate)Reference semantics (think how you copy a vector of pointers to base class?)Value semantics (copying is trivial)Algorithm scattered into classesAlgorithm in one placeLanguage supported (Clear errors if pure-virtual is not implemented)Library supported (poor error messages)Creates a first-class abstractionIt’s just a containerKeeps fluent interfaces…