Reputation: 2266
So, I've been looking at boost::array but it does require default constructor defined. I think the best way of filling this array with data, would be through a push_back(const T&) method. Calling it more times than SIZE (known at compile-time) would result in assert or exception, depending on build configuration. This way it would always contain meaningful data. Does anyone know efficient, portable, reliable implementation of this concept?
Upvotes: 1
Views: 2598
Reputation: 299730
Well, I would have thought that someone would have brought the answer now, however it seems not, so let's go.
What you are wishing for is something I have myself dreamed of: a boost::optional_array<T,N>
.
There are two variants:
boost::array< boost::optional<T>, N >
, that is each element may or may not be set.std::vector<T>
(somehow), that is all beginning elements are set and all following ones are not.Given the previous questions / comments, it seems you would like the second, but it doesn't really matter as both are quite alike.
template <typename T, size_t N>
class stack_vector
{
public:
bool empty() const { return mSize == 0; }
size_t size() const { return mSize; }
size_t capacity() const { return N; }
size_t max_size() const { return N; }
T& operator[](size_t i) { return *(this->pfront() + i); }
/// ...
private:
T* pfront() const { return reinterpret_cast<T*>(&mStorage); }
std::aligned_storage< N * sizeof(T), alignof(T) > mStorage;
size_t mSize; // indicate how many elements are set, from the beginning
};
Let's focus on those very special operations:
template <typename T, size_t N>
void push_back(T const& t)
{
new (this->pfront() + mSize) T(t); // in place construction
++mSize;
}
template <typename T, size_t N>
void clear()
{
for (size_t i = 0; i != mSize; ++i)
{
(this->pfront() + i)->~T();
}
mSize = 0;
}
As you can notice, the main difficulty is to remember that:
There are many operations on traditional STL container that may be tricky to implement. On a vector
, element shuffling (due to insert
or erase
) are perhaps the most stricking examples.
Also note that with C++0x and initializer-lists vector
get emplace_back
to directly construct an element in place, thus lifting the CopyConstructible
requirement, might be a nice boon dependent on your case.
Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 33655
may be store a boost::variant in your boost::array? make the first parameter an int or something..
i.e.
boost::array<boost::variant<int, foo>, 6> bar;
okay you have to deal with a variant, but it's stack allocated...
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 96233
Why does it have to reside on the stack? Do you have empirical evidence that creating and reserve
ing a vector
is too slow (using a vector
seems like the obvious answer)?
Even if it is, you can create a pool of vectors that have space reserved and swap
one of the pre-allocated vectors into a local copy. When you're done with the local one, swap it back again (much like the splice
trick for list
s).
Upvotes: -1
Reputation: 42227
boost::array<T, 12> ta;
is no different from T[12] ta;
; if you don't use an initializer list then the elements will be default constructed.
The common workaround would be boost::array<T*, 12> ta;
or maybe boost::array<unique_ptr<T>, 12> ta;
.
The only way to store by value is to copy, no way around that... This is what initializer lists do:
struct A {
A(int i):_i(i){ cout << "A(int)" << endl; }
A(const A& a){ cout << "A(const A&)" << endl; }
~A(){ cout << "~A()" << endl; }
int _i;
};
int main(){
boost::array<A, 2> ta = {{1, 2}};
}
This outputs:
A(int)
A(const A&)
A(int)
A(const A&)
~A()
~A()
~A()
~A()
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 1412
In C++0x you got std::array<type, size>
(probably the same as boost::array). You can initialize array data by using fill()
or std::fill_n()
:
std::array<int, 30> array;
array.fill(0);
boost::array<int, 30> barray;
std::fill_n(barray.begin(), 30, 0);
If you want to get it default-initialized at definition you can use copy-ctor:
static std::array<int, 30> const nullarray = {0, 0, 0, ..., 0}; // nullarray.fill(0);
// (...)
std::array<int, 30> array{nullarray};
Upvotes: -1