C++Talk.NET Forum Index C++Talk.NET
C++ language newsgroups
 
Archives   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Which operator ~

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    C++Talk.NET Forum Index -> C++ language (comp.lang.c++)
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Csaba
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:22 pm    Post subject: Which operator ~ Reply with quote



I have a class which contains an integer acting as a bit map (i.e.
individual bits have separate meanings)

union foo
{
int integer_;
struct{ /* here be bitfields */ } parts_;

foo( int i ) : integer( i ) {}
// various operators here
}

I have implemented operators &= |= ^= as members and operator & | ^ as
nonmembers (as recommeded in More Effective C++).

I'm now wondering how to implement operator~
I can see two possibilities:

1. Member operator:

foo::operator ~() const
{
return foo( ~integer_ );
}

2. Non-member operator:

foo operator ~ ( const foo& f )
{
return foo( f.integer_ );
}

(union behaves like struct: access is public by default, otherwise the
nonmember would have to be a friend).

The two are mutually exclusive; they both do the job. Which one should I
choose ? Which one is better/cleaner/more canonical ?

If I change the data memebrs to private:

union foo
{
private:
int integer_;
struct{ /* here be bitfields */ } parts_;
public:
foo( int i ) : integer( i ) {}
// various operators here
}

then having operator~ as a member is more convenient (no need to declare
it as a friend because it already has access to the private members).
Would that be sufficient reason to choose it ?

--
Life is complex, with real and imaginary parts.
Back to top
Victor Bazarov
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 1:40 pm    Post subject: Re: Which operator ~ Reply with quote



Csaba wrote:
Quote:
I have a class which contains an integer acting as a bit map (i.e.
individual bits have separate meanings)

union foo
{
int integer_;
struct{ /* here be bitfields */ } parts_;

foo( int i ) : integer( i ) {}
// various operators here
}

I have implemented operators &= |= ^= as members and operator & | ^ as
nonmembers (as recommeded in More Effective C++).

I'm now wondering how to implement operator~
I can see two possibilities:

1. Member operator:

foo::operator ~() const

foo foo::operator ~() const

Quote:
{
return foo( ~integer_ );
}

2. Non-member operator:

foo operator ~ ( const foo& f )
{
return foo( f.integer_ );

return foo( ~f.integer_ );

Quote:
}

(union behaves like struct: access is public by default, otherwise the
nonmember would have to be a friend).

The two are mutually exclusive; they both do the job. Which one should I
choose ? Which one is better/cleaner/more canonical ?

According to Meyers, the second would be more canonical. Any operator
that doesn't change its operand should be non-member...

Quote:

If I change the data memebrs to private:

union foo
{
private:
int integer_;
struct{ /* here be bitfields */ } parts_;
public:
foo( int i ) : integer( i ) {}
// various operators here
}

then having operator~ as a member is more convenient (no need to declare
it as a friend because it already has access to the private members).

How about the rest of the operators?

Quote:
Would that be sufficient reason to choose it ?

Not really.

V

Back to top
Csaba
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:59 pm    Post subject: Re: Which operator ~ Reply with quote



Victor Bazarov <v.Abazarov (AT) comAcast (DOT) net> wrote in
news:t2rFe.21867$Tf5.18974 (AT) newsread1 (DOT) mlpsca01.us.to.verio.net:

Quote:
Csaba wrote:
I have a class which contains an integer acting as a bit map (i.e.
individual bits have separate meanings)

union foo
{
int integer_;
struct{ /* here be bitfields */ } parts_;

foo( int i ) : integer( i ) {}
// various operators here
}

I have implemented operators &= |= ^= as members and operator & | ^
as nonmembers (as recommeded in More Effective C++).

I'm now wondering how to implement operator~
I can see two possibilities:

1. Member operator:

foo::operator ~() const

foo foo::operator ~() const

{
return foo( ~integer_ );
}

2. Non-member operator:

foo operator ~ ( const foo& f )
{
return foo( f.integer_ );

return foo( ~f.integer_ );

}

Duh ! Serves me right for not using copy&paste from the real source :-(

Quote:

(union behaves like struct: access is public by default, otherwise
the nonmember would have to be a friend).

The two are mutually exclusive; they both do the job. Which one
should I choose ? Which one is better/cleaner/more canonical ?

According to Meyers, the second would be more canonical. Any operator
that doesn't change its operand should be non-member...


Now *that* makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

--
Life is complex, with real and imaginary parts.

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    C++Talk.NET Forum Index -> C++ language (comp.lang.c++) All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group
SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.