Skip to main content

C++ templates should define traits

Exposing type information "out" from a class template appears to me as a good practice. For example, a class template Array<T> should define a trait which looks something like typedef T Array:TYPE in its public interface. Not only the parameter type, it should also expose any composite types used inside the template.

There are several good reasons behind it.

1. Member functions of the class can make use of the traits.
2. You can avoid typing really long names using these quick typedefs.
3. Consistency.
4. Other classes can make use of the traits. For example, derived classes. Sometimes it is simply not possible to write a non-template derived class of a parameterized class if the parameterized base-class does not expose necessary traits.

For example,
template <typename T> class Array;
template <typename T> class Access_Table {
Array<T> array_;
};

A new class AT_Adapter wants to adapt Access_Table<T> by adding get_array() function. It simply returns the Access_Table<T>::array_ by reference.

class AT_Adapter : Access_Table <char> {
const WHAT_IS_THIS_TYPE &get_array () const;
};

But what is the return type of the function? Therefore, class Access_Table<T> should be modified as

template <typename T> class Access_Table {
typedef Array<T> ARRAY_TYPE;
ARRAY_TYPE array_;
};

So that, the following works:

class AT_Adapter : Access_Table <char> {
const Access_Table<char>::ARRAY_TYPE &get_array () const;
};

Comments

Sajo Jacob said…
Hello found your site interesting, I have added your site to my blog links, Please let me know if thats cool? :)
Tue Apr 25, 09:45:00 PM PDT
Post a Comment

Popular Content

Want speed? Use constexpr meta-programming!

It's official: C++11 has two meta-programming languages embedded in it! One is based on templates and other one using constexpr . Templates have been extensively used for meta-programming in C++03. C++11 now gives you one more option of writing compile-time meta-programs using constexpr . The capabilities differ, however. The meta-programming language that uses templates was discovered accidently and since then countless techniques have been developed. It is a pure functional language which allows you to manipulate compile-time integral literals and types but not floating point literals. Most people find the syntax of template meta-programming quite abominable because meta-functions must be implemented as structures and nested typedefs. Compile-time performance is also a pain point for this language feature. The generalized constant expressions (constexpr for short) feature allows C++11 compiler to peek into the implementation of a function (even classes) and perform optimization...
37 comments
Read more

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...
20 comments
Read more

Rvalue references in constructor: when less is more

I've seen a recurring mistake made by well-versed C++03 programmers when they set out to use rvalue references for the first time. In fact, as it turns out, better you are at C++03, easier it is to fall in the trap of rvalue reference anti-pattern I'm gonna talk about. Consider the following C++03 class: class Book { public: Book(const std::string & title, const std::vector<std::string> & authors, const std::string & pub, size_t pub_day const std::string & pub_month, size_t pub_year) : _title(title), _authors(authors), _publisher(pub), _pub_day(pub_day), _pub_month(pub_month), _pub_year(pub_year) {} // .... // .... private: std::string _title; std::vector<std::string> _authors; std::string _publisher; size_t _pub_day; std::string _pub_month; size_t _pub_year; }; The Book class above is as dull as it can be. Now lets C++11'fy it!...
24 comments
Read more