Re: Object Ptr as Handle ?

Hi all,

Thanks for your comments. A few more details on the actual design ...
The code goes something like follows:

typedef PVOID HANDLE;

class Base {

public:

virtual int Action1 (void) {
return REQ_NOT_SUPP;
}

virtual int Action2 (void) {
return REQ_NOT_SUPP;
}

};

class Derived1: public Base {
public:
int Action1 (void) {
DoSomething ();
}
};

class Derived2 : public Base {
public:
int Action2 (void) {
DoSomethingelse ();
}
};

class Mgr {
private:
Base* m_pManagedObjects [MAX_OBJ];

public:

CreateAndAddObject (create_info, HANDLE *phObj)
{

Base *pBase;
if (create_info)
    pBase = new Derived1 ();
else
    pBase = new Derived2 ();

*phObj = (HANDLE) pBase;

pManagedObjects [free_loc] = pBase;

}

ManipulateObjects (HANDLE hObj) {

Base *pObj = (Base *) hObj;

CheckIfInManagedList ();

pObj->Action1 ();
}

};

My Mgr is a singleton and it manages all objects that are derived from
Base. I got comments that this method violates OOPS concepts and that
passing on the object pointer as a handle is not a good idea. The
alternate method I could think was to keep a handle map table in Mgr.
I'm working on embedded systems and I do not wish to waste memory on
such a table if the existing solution is not a recipe for disaster.

I'm not sure which OOPS principle is in violation here as well. As
illustrated above, most functions in my base class are virtual and says
"request_not_supported". My derived classes override only the functions
they support. In net effect, my base class always has the sum of all
the I/Fs of my derived classes.

Kindly send in your suggestions.

--
      [ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
      [ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]