I want to access the variables width/height/size from the nested class, putting static infront of them works, but is there another way?
class random_messages;
int max_x;
int max_y;
rand int width;
rand int height;
rand int size;
class rand_x;
randc int loc_x;
constraint sizes {
loc_x < width / 2**(size+3); //accessing here
loc_x > 0;
}
endclass
endlcass
Don't make the confusion of thinking that just because you define class rand_x inside the class random_messages, it automatically means that an object of the nested class gets instantiated inside an object of the wrapper class. Declaring a nested class only changes the scope where it is defined.
In your case, if you want to access variables of the parent object, you'll have to do the following:
(in the nested class) Declare a handle to the parent and take the parent in as a constructor parameter:
class rand_x;
// ...
protected random_messages m_parent;
function new(random_messages parent);
m_parent = parent;
endfunction
endclass
(in the outer class) Declare an instance of the inner class and pass yourself as its parent:
class random_messages;
// ...
rand rand_x x;
function new();
x = new(this);
endfunction
endclass
Related
This question already has an answer here:
Is there a difference in how member variables are initialized in Dart?
(1 answer)
Closed 1 year ago.
I'm trying to understand the following example where I try to initialize a final variable in a constructor.
1st example - works
void main() {
Test example = new Test(1,2);
print(example.a); //print gives 1
}
class Test
{
final int a;
int b;
Test(this.a, this.b);
}
2nd example doesn't work
void main() {
Test example = new Test(1,2);
print(example.a); //compiler throws an error
}
class Test
{
final int a;
int b;
Test(int a, int b){
this.a = a;
this.b = b;
}
}
and when i remove final then it works again
void main() {
Test example = new Test(1,2);
print(example.a); //print gives 1
}
class Test
{
int a;
int b;
Test(int a, int b){
this.a = a;
this.b = b;
}
}
what is the difference between the constructor in the 1st and the 2nd constructor why final initialization works with the first and doesn't with the 2nd.
Can anyone explain that to me please?
THanks
You cannot instantiate final fields in the constructor body.
Instance variables can be final, in which case they must be set exactly once. Initialize final, non-late instance variables at declaration, using a constructor parameter, or using a constructor’s initializer list:
Declare a constructor by creating a function with the same name as
its class (plus, optionally, an additional identifier as described in
Named constructors). The most common form of constructor, the
generative constructor, creates a new instance of a class
syntax in the constructor (described in https://www.dartlang.org/guides/language/language-tour#constructors):
My question refers to Methods inside of Classes via "public" access.
As referring to mql4 documentation, there seems to be no listed source on how to properly instantiate a Method into a Class, or what even makes a Method a Method in the first place.
To me it seems that if you place a function inside of a Class, that in itself makes it a Method? Or am I wrong. Is anyone able to clear this up for me?
Basic information and differences between constructor and method:
Constructor:
A constructor is a special function, which is called automatically when creating an object of a structure or class and is usually used to initialize class members,
The name of a constructor must match the class name,
The constructor has no return type (you can specify the void type).
(docs)
Method:
A method is a function that belongs to a class or an object, i.e. it cannot exist without the class.
You need to declare class methods in the class. Else it wouldn't be a class method.
Method can return value with type specified in the method declaration.
Simple example:
class MyClass { // Declaration
private:
string myName; // Property
public:
void printName(); // Method of void return type
int sumIntegers(int a, int b); // Method of int return type
MyClass(string name); // Constructor declaration
};
MyClass::MyClass(string name) { // Constructor body
this.myName = name;
}
int MyClass::sumIntegers(int a, int b) { //Method body
return a + b;
}
void MyClass::printName() {
Print("Your name is: ", this.myName);
}
int sumIntegers(int a, int b){ //Function body
return a + b;
}
Class member (object) initialization:
MyClass *myObject = new MyClass("SO example");
Example usage inside OnInit:
int OnInit() {
myObject.printName(); // Method call by object (MyClass)
Alert("2 + 2 = ", myObject.sumIntegers(2, 2)); // Same as above
Alert("2 + 2 = ", sumIntegers(2, 2)); // Function call
return(INIT_SUCCEEDED);
}
To me it seems that if you place a function inside of a Class, that in
itself makes it a Method?
Yes, but remember that a function is a block of code which only runs when it is called, and it's not related with a class.
Methods are related with class, and can not exists without a class.
I have multiple class like this:-
Class A {
static int xyz = 10;
int c;
int d;
static A getData() {
// Do something
return A()..c = xyz*5;
}
Class B {
static int abc = 10;
int c;
static B getData() {
// Do something
return B()..c = xyz*5;
}
So, here you can see that the the getData() is doing the same thing, but have different return types.
Is there any way to avoid duplicate implementation like this, can it be done by defining a single function which can reference the class and have multiple return type?
This has two parts: creating the object, and assigning to a field of the object.
Creating the object, you are mostly out of luck. The only way to create an object of a specific type in a generic method is by using reflection via dart:mirrors. However, you have indicated that this is for a Flutter project, and Flutter doesn't support reflection, so that isn't an option. The only way you are going to be able to dynamically create an object is to pass in a factory method that the generic method can call to construct the object.
Assigning to a field of the object is easier, but it requires that you either lose static type checking by using dynamic or by tying your classes together with inheritance. The latter is the preferable choice, but if you are working with a library than it isn't always an option.
Combining these two things, the code will look like this:
class Foo {
static int xyz = 10;
int c;
}
class A extends Foo {
int d;
static A getData() {
return modifyObject(() => A());
}
}
class B extends Foo {
static B getData() {
return modifyObject(() => B());
}
}
T modifyObject<T extends Foo>(T create()) {
return create()..c = Foo.xyz * 5;
}
Before doing this, though, I'd take a look at whether your project actually needs it. If your use case is as simple as your example, I would argue that this level of generalization is overkill and you are hurting your code's readability more than you are helping its modularity.
let's assume i have a wrapper class that embeds a single memeber:
class wrapper {
public:
Object obj;
// the rest ...
};
if the member variable obj has some methods, how can i call the member variable method without explicitly defining methods in the wrapper class like this?
class wrapper{
public:
void foo { obj.foo (); }
int bar (int x) {return obj.bar(x); }
};
i know this is doable in python, but how can i have the same functionality in c++?
ps- please note i don't want to inherit from the member class. this wouldn't't be a wrapper class by definition. i want to achieve this through composition instead.
There are a few ways to handle this. One would be to create a getter to return the wrapper object and another is to override the typecast operator:
class Object {
public:
void foo() {cout << "test" << endl;}
};
class wrapper {
protected:
Object obj;
public:
operator Object&() {return obj;}
Object& getObject() {return obj;}
};
void f(A& a) {
a.foo();
}
int main() {
wrapper w;
((Object)w).foo();
w.getObject().foo();
f(w);
return 0;
}
As you can see, the typecast operator requires you to cast the wrapper object, except when passing as a parameter to the function f().
Also, in your example you already have the obj member as public so it is exposed. You could just:
wrapper w;
w.obj.foo();
Here's a discussion on that: What good are public variables then?
I'm novice in .net c++ and trying to create class looking like:
public ref class Klient
{
public:
Klient(){}
// zmienne
static DWORD klienty[41][2];
static int i = 1;
static DWORD* pid;
static HANDLE* handle;
//funkcje
};
but MSV says that:
error C4368: cannot define 'klienty' as a member of managed 'Klient': mixed types are not supported
What's wrong with this code?
You can have .NET basic data types as members of your managed class (static int i), or pointers to anything unmanaged (DWORD* pid, HANDLE* handle), but you're not allowed to have an unmanaged object directly, and the array of integers counts as an unmanaged object for this purpose.
Since the only item giving you a problem here is the unmanaged array, you could switch it to a managed array.
public ref class Klient
{
public:
Klient(){}
// zmienne
static array<DWORD,2>^ klienty = gcnew array<DWORD,2>(41,2);
static int i = 1;
static DWORD* pid;
static HANDLE* handle;
//funkcje
};
Or, you can declare a unmanaged class, put whatever you need to in there, and have a pointer to it from the managed class. (If you do this in a non-static context, don't forget to delete the unmanaged memory from your finalizer.)
public class HolderOfUnmanagedStuff
{
public:
DWORD klienty[41][2];
int i;
DWORD* pid;
HANDLE* handle;
HolderOfUnmanagedStuff()
{
i = 1;
}
};
public ref class Klient
{
public:
Klient(){}
// zmienne
static HolderOfUnmanagedStuff* unmanagedStuff = new HolderOfUnmanagedStuff();
//funkcje
};