Re: Which design in better?
Nitesh <niteshchordiya@gmail.com> kirjutas:
Objects of type X are basic building blocks of my application and
there are a few functions which return XHandle (typedef X** XHandle).
The task at hand needs to use a couple of these functions and then
iterate over X objects.
Because its done frequently and it separates iteration from task-at-
hand'logic we decided to create iterator.
Assuming the availability of functions GetXHandleSize(XHandle) and
DisposeXHandle(XHandle) there are two alternatives.
<b>Option1:</b> Using simple inheritance
class XHandleIterator {
public:
XHandleIterator(void) : mHandle(0L), mCount(0) {}
~XHandleIterator() { if (mHandle != 0L) DisposeXHandle(mHandle); }
bool Done(void) { return mCount > 0; }
// Pre-increment operator
XHandleIterator& operator++(void) { --mCount; return *this; } // Am
iterating over backwards
// Post-increment operator..
// De-referencing operator
X& operator *(void) { return (*mHandle)[mCount-1]; }
protected:
XHandle mHandle;
int mCount;
};
class XHandleIteratorOne : public XHandleIterator {
public:
XHandleIteratorOne(SomeType obj) {
// Creates XHandle someway. Assigns to mHandle and mCount
}
};
class XHandleIteratorTwo : public XHandleIterator {
XHandleIteratorTwo(SomeType obj) {
// Creates XHandle in another way. Assigns to mHandle and mCount
}
};
<b>Option2:</b> Policy based design
template<typename HandleCreator>
class XHandleIterator {
public:
XHandleIterator (SomeType obj) : mHandle(0L), mCount(0)
{
HandleCreator::Create(obj, &mHandle);
mCount = GetXHandleSize(mHandle)/sizeof(X);
}
~XHandleIterator() { if (mHandle != 0L) DisposeXHandle(mHandle); }
bool Done(void) { return mCount > 0; }
// Pre-increment operator
XHandleIterator& operator++(void) { --mCount; return *this; }
// Post-increment operator...
// De-referencing operator
X& operator *(void) { return (*mHandle)[mCount-1]; }
private:
XHandle mHandle;
int mCount;
};
struct XHandleCreator1 {
static void Create(SomeType obj, XHandle *handle) {
// Creates XHandle someway. Assigns to handle
}
};
struct XHandleCreator2 {
static void Create(SomeType obj, XHandle *handle) {
// Creates XHandle in another way. Assigns to handle
}
};
typedef XHandleIterator<XHandleCreator1> XHandleIteratorOne;
typedef XHandleIterator<XHandleCreator2> XHandleIteratorTwo;
I am confused over which is the right way to do in this case with all
stipulations stated at the top. The main thing I like about 2nd one is
that mHandle and mCount are private.
Please comment on which of the above alternative is better?
Thanks
Nitesh
It appears you want the iterator to perform two tasks: iterate over the
array, and dispose the array when done. It would be cleaner to keep these
tasks separate IMO. To follow the STL pattern there should be a
"container" class, from where the iterators can be obtained by begin()
and end() member functions. The fact that the data is actually living
elsewhere does not have any significance. The "container" object will
call Dispose in its destructor.
The usage would go like this:
XContainer my_xvector = ObtainXHandleInWhatEverWay();
for(XContainer::iterator p = my_xvector.begin();
p != my_xvector.end(); ++p) {
X& xref = *p;
// Do whatever with X
}
I see no need for inheritance or policy-based templates here, based on
the info you provided. The container object should just have a
constructor and/or an assignment operator taking XHandle as a parameter,
regardless of in which way the handle was obtained. Mixing up this class
with different ways to obtain the handle would just convolute the design.
If really needed, one could provide a separate "factory" class for taking
care of obtaining the handle in different ways.
hth
Paavo