CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c++typesunordered-map
Seth Hays
Seth Hays

Reputation: 411

Is there a cleaner way to replicate an unordered_map with multi-type values in c++(11)

The basic idea is to get a unordered_map that stores values of different types. What I am trying to do is to create an easy accessible object to a OpenGL Uniform Buffer Object. The end product would look something like:

UBO ubo = { "Uniforms", "translation", "scale", "rotation", "enabled" };
ubo["scale"]       = 0.5f;
ubo["translation"] = { 0.1f, 0.1f, 0.0f };
ubo["rotation"]    = { 90.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f };
ubo["enabled"]     = GL_TRUE;

In my UBO class I have overloaded operator[]:

struct UBOData;

class UBO
{
    std::unordered_map<std::string,UBOData>
    ...
    public: 
    UBOData &operator[](std::string key)
    {
        UBOData data = new UBOData();
        dataMap.emplace(key, data);
        return data;
    }

    const UBOData& operator[](std::string key)
    {
        return const_cast<UBOData&>(*this)[key];
    }
};

And I am using UBOData to store different data types. This is where my confidence wanes in the light of what is "right" in the c++ world.

.
.
.
struct UBOData
{
    enum ReturnType {Undefined, rInt, rFloat, rDouble};

    void       *value;
    ReturnType type;
    int &operator=(int lhs);
    float &operator=(float lhs);
    double &operator=(double lhs);
};

I have truncated the types for this example, no std::array types. Also notice I am using a void * to store the value and tell me I need to rethink my design. Of course I do that's why I am here :)

int &UBOData::operator=(int lhs)
{
    if (type == Undefined) { type = rInt; } else { assert(type == rInt); }
    value = new int(lhs);
    int &rValue = *((int*)value);
    return rValue;
}

float &UBOData::operator=(float lhs)
{
    if (type == Undefined) { type = rFloat; }
    else { assert(type == rFloat); }

    value = new float(lhs);
    float &rValue = *((float*)value);
    return rValue;
}

double &UBOData::operator=(double lhs)
{
    if (type == Undefined) { type = rDouble; }
    else { assert(type == rInt); }

    value = new double(lhs);
    double &rValue = *((double*)value);
    return rValue;
}

I've attempted to wrap the void* with type checking but is there a better way to get a multi-type map without void *?

Note: I am using VS2013 on Windows and clang on Mac and Linux.

Upvotes: 0

Views: 953

Answers (2)

Jesse Good
Jesse Good

Reputation: 52365

Definitely boost::variant. That is what its built for. Here is a small example using your code:

#include <unordered_map>
#include <vector>
#include <boost/variant.hpp>

class UBO
{
    using UBOData = boost::variant<float, std::vector<float>>;
    std::unordered_map<std::string, UBOData> dataMap;
    public: 
    UBO() : dataMap(){}
    UBOData &operator[](const std::string& key)
    {
        return dataMap[key];
    }
};

int main()
{
   UBO ubo;
   ubo["scale"]       = 0.5f;
   ubo["translation"] = std::vector<float>{ 0.1f, 0.1f, 0.0f };
   ubo["rotation"]    = std::vector<float>{ 90.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f };
}

If you want the { 0.1f, 0.1f, 0.0f } syntax without typing std::vector<float>, etc, you probably would need some type of proxy that handles initializer lists.

Upvotes: 0

Yakk - Adam Nevraumont
Yakk - Adam Nevraumont

Reputation: 275385

boost::variant or boost::any.

If you cannot or will not use boost, read what they did.

I would go with variant myself.

Upvotes: 2

Related Questions