I know that, normally, 'objects' of a class cannot access the private members. But in the function definition of a copy constructor, you use objects to access the private members members. How come?
eg:-
class Sample {int i,j;
public:
Sample(int a, int b)
{i=a;j=b;}
Sample(Sample &S)
{j=s.j;i=s.i;}
}
It is the same class. A different instance, but the same class.
private means that the member is only visible within the class - including other instances.
Related
I have this UML diagram
Ad this is the corresponding C++ code
//Parent class Flight
class Flight
{
private:
int callNumber;
Airplane plane;
vector<Passenger> passengers;
public:
//Constructor
Flight();
//Functions
int getCallNum();
void setCallNum();
Airplane getPlane();
//What parameters are taken in these functions.
//I know they are of type Airplane and passenger but are they vectors?
void setPlane(Airplane);
void addPassenger(Passenger);
void removePassenger(Passenger);
};
//Airplane class, child of Flight
class Airplane : public Flight
{
private:
int firstClassSeats;
int economySeats;
public:
//Constructor
Airplane();
//Functions;
int getFirstClassSeats();
int getEconomySeats();
void setFirstClassSeats();
void setEconomySeats();
};
//Passenger class, child of FLight
class Passenger : public Flight
{
private:
string name;
int age;
string address;
public:
//Constructor
Passenger();
//Functions
string getName();
int getAge();
string getAddress();
void setName(string);
void setAge(int);
void setAddress(string);
};
I wonder:
do constructors of all classes run when an object of either parent or base class is created?
Can base class access functions or data of child classes?
I do not know how set plane function in parent class would look like. Would it take an object of type Airplane as an argument? Similarly, will addpassenger function in parent class take a vector of type Passenger as an argument?
In short
If A inherits B (or A specializes B), then you should be able to say A is a (kind of) B. When in doubt, prefer object composition over inheritance.
More details
The parameters taken by the member functions, are the parameters that you indicate for the operations in the diagram. No parameter in the diagram leads to no parameters in the code.
The inheritance here is ambigous. There is no inheritance in your diagram. There is some in your code, but it does not make so much sense: is a passenger really a flight? E.g. can a passenger fly, have a crew, etc.?
If the inheritance would be suitable, as a general rule in C++: the constructor of an object is always called when the object is created. In case of inheritance, all the constructors of the class hierarchy are invoked, starting with the base constructor, until the most derived constructor (the rules can be more tricky, for example in case of multiple inheritance). In UML, the rules on constructors are not fully specified as far as I know.
By default, a class can only access public members of another class. If a class is derived from a base class (in UML: if a class is a specialisation of a more general class), the derived class has only access to the public and protected members of the base class. Try to avoid protected, since it's a frequent cause of nasty bugs.
WHen implementing in C++ an UML class diagram, there is a tricky issue about the types of the properties and arguments, because C++ has a value semantic: if you pass an Airplane as argument, the original airplane object is copied. Same if you have an Airplane property. However, in UML, properties and associations have a reference semantic (except for datatypes), meaning that the airplane argument would still refer to the same original airplane. So in your specific case, you'd probably want to pass a reference or a (smart) pointer to an Airplane.
While I was using class, I found that some attributes, especially the ones which are boolean, are often read by other instances. For example,
class Node{
private:
int item;
bool visited;
public:
bool isVisited(){return visited;}
void bar(){
...
visited=true;
...
}
};
class Graph{
private:
vector<Node> nodes;
public:
void bar(int idx){
if(nodes[idx].isVidited()){
...
nodes[idx].foo();
...
}
}
}
In that case if visited is only changed by the methods of the class Node, then the access controller of the attribute visited shouldn't always be private in perspective of reading. What if there is an access controller 'readonly' that is opened to reading, closed to writing? I think that is useful when defining state attributes. Will there be any side effects?
Have you tried marking the Graph class as friend inside the Node class?
This facilitates accessing the private members of the Node class by the Graph class.
In some languages, there is getter/setter which works as an api of a private value.
It seems like a public value, but internally the methods control the private member variable, not the code with '=' operator itself.
//TYPESCRIPT
class Foo{
private _name:string
constructor(n:string){this._name=n}
get name(){return this._name}
//set name(n:string){this._name=n}
}
const foo=new Foo('Jack jack')
console.log(foo.name) //[LOG]: "Jack jack"
foo.name='hudson' //[ERR]: Cannot set property name of #<Foo> which has only a getter
The code above shows how a readonly property is set. There is only a getter which delivers exactly the same value of the private member variable '_name', but since setter is not defined, only the class itself can change the value and is not able to edit from outside of the class.
I m preparing a class in my flutterfire project and their I want to use some method Which can't change further so that I want to know consept of static keyword in Dart ?
"static" means a member is available on the class itself instead of on instances of the class. That's all it means, and it isn't used for anything else. static modifies members.
Static methods
Static methods (class methods) don’t operate on an instance, and thus don’t have access to this. They do, however, have access to static variables.
void main() {
print(Car.numberOfWheels); //here we use a static variable.
// print(Car.name); // this gives an error we can not access this property without creating an instance of Car class.
print(Car.startCar());//here we use a static method.
Car car = Car();
car.name = 'Honda';
print(car.name);
}
class Car{
static const numberOfWheels =4;
Car({this.name});
String name;
// Static method
static startCar(){
return 'Car is starting';
}
}
static keyword in dart used to declare a variable or method that belongs to just the class not the instants which means the class has only one copy of that variable or method and those static variables(class variables) or static methods(class methods) can not be used by the instances created by the class.
for example if we declare a class as
class Foo {
static String staticVariable = "Class variable";
final String instanceVariable = "Instance variable";
static void staticMethod(){
print('This is static method');
}
void instanceMethod(){
print('instance method');
}
}`
the thing here to remember is static variables are created only once and every instance crated by the class has different instance variables. therefore you can not call static variables form the class instances.
following codes are valid,
Foo.staticVariable;
Foo().instanceVariable;
Foo.staticMethod();
Foo().instanceMethod();
there for following codes will give errors
Foo().staticVariable;
Foo.instanceVariable;
Foo().staticMethod;
Foo.instanceMethod
Use of static variables and methods
you can use static variables when you have constant values or common values that are relevant for the class.
you can read more here - https://dart.dev/guides/language/language-tour#class-variables-and-methods
I want to initialize a variable class for my Base class and modify it only in some children classes.
The initialization of this class variable is in the header:
class Base{
public:
Base();
int a = 1;
The header of my derived class is:
class ChildA : public Base{
public:
ChildA ();
int a = 2;
}
Problem
I tried to run this:
Base classe*;
classe = new ChildA();
std::cout << classe->a << std::endl;
The problem is that, instead of printing 2 as I expected, it prints 1 (value initialized in my parent class). For other derived classes, I want classe->a to still return 1.
How can I solve this?
What you are seeing are the results of upcasting - having a base class point to a derived class object.
I highly recommend you read more on the topic, but a simplified picture is that the base class "carries" the whole object (base and derived content), but can access only it's original, own content. This is why you see a value from the base class rather than the derived class.
Lippman's C++ Primer has a very comprehensive explanation of upcasting, downcasting, object slicing, and other inheritance-related concepts. This includes implementing virtual functions which give you the functionality to invoke derived class functions through an interface that's common with base.
|----------------|-----------------|
| a (for Base) | a (for ChildA) |
|----------------|-----------------|
\________________/
^
|_ classe
Sorry if my drawing is not that good! As you can see in the above picture, when you create an object of type ChildA, this object contains a part for keeping the data members of the base class (i.e. Base) and another part for the data members of derived class (i.e. ChildA). Considering the fact that you have a pointer to the base class (i.e. classe), this pointer only allows you to access the base member variables and methods. So calling classe->a, returns the Base::a for you, that is 1.
If you change the type of classe pointer into ChildA, in that case calling classe->a will return 2, because it refers to the a inside the derived class, i.e. ChildA::a.
For other derived classes, I want classe->a to still return 1. How can
I solve this?
If you need in some derived classes to access different as, it is better to have a virtual function in the base class and override the base function if needed:
class Base {
public:
Base() {}
virtual int getA() { return a; }
private:
int a = 1;
};
class ChildA : public Base
{
public:
ChildA() {}
int a = 2;
};
class ChildB : public Base
{
public:
ChildB() {}
int getA() { return a; }
private:
int a = 2;
};
Now by calling getA() on a pointer of Base or ChildA, you will have 1, but calling getA on an object of type ChildB will return 2.
I have C++ code (not mine, so it is not editable). Problem is with extending protected functions and class.
#include "ExtraClass.h"
...
MyClass::MyClass()
{
...
protected:
bool Func{}
ExtraClass m_Foo;
...
}
I need access in Python to m_Foo methods and protected functions like Func() like
from MyClass import *
bar = MyClass()
bar.m_Foo.Run() //something like this
but have an compiler error:
*error: ‘ExtraClass MyApp::m_Foo’ is protected*
PS. If I change protected with public (just for try). I can access *m_Foo* only in readonly mode:
class_<MyClass>("MyClass", init<>())
.def_readonly("m_Foo", &MyClass::m_Foo)
Changing to *def_readwrite* went to compiler error:
/boost_1_52_0/boost/python/data_members.hpp:64:11: error: no match for ‘operator=’ in ‘(((ExtraClass)c) + ((sizetype)((const boost::python::detail::member<ExtraClass, MyClass>*)this)->boost::python::detail::member<ExtraClass, MyClass>::m_which)) = d’
Thank you for any help!
In general, if you want to wrap protected members, then you need to derive a (wrapper) class from the parent that makes the members public. (You can simply say using Base::ProtectedMember in a public section to expose it instead of wrapping it). You will then have wrap it normally. Like this:
class MyWrapperClass : public MyClass {
public:
using MyClass::m_Foo;
};
In this particular example (which is really not fully baked), if you want to access m_Foo, then you need to wrap ExtraClass. Assuming that you have The problem with readwrite is likely the implementation of ExtraClass (which probably doesn't supply a operator= that you can use).