StackOverflow2013

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals

PO
primarykey
Id
8860531
data
AcceptedAnswerId
0
AnswerCount
0
ClosedDate
CommentCount
1
CommunityOwnedDate
CreationDate
2012-01-14T06:09:42.830
FavoriteCount
0
LastActivityDate
2012-01-14T06:09:42.830
LastEditDate
LastEditorUserId
0
OwnerUserId
1148885
ParentId
8859546
PostTypeId
2
Score
1
ViewCount
0
LastEditorDisplayName
text
Body
The simplest answer to your question is that you must declare your container correctly and you must define an appropriate assigment operator for your class. Working as closely as possible from your example: <pre><code>typedef class MyActionableClass T; T* getGlobalPointer(); void AddInstance(T const& objInstance) { T* arrayFromElsewhere = getGlobalPointer(); //ok, now at this point we have a reference to an object instance //and a pointer which we assume is at the base of an array of T **objects** //whose first element we don't mind losing //**copy** the instance we've received arrayFromElsewhere[0] = objInstance; //now invoke the action() method on our **copy** arrayFromElsewhere[0].action(); </code></pre> } Note the signature change to const reference which emphasizes that we are going to copy the original object and not change it in any way. Also note carefully that arrayFromElsewhere[0].action() is NOT the same as objInstance.action() because you have made a copy — action() is being invoked in a different context, no matter how similar. While it is obvious you have condensed, the condensation makes the reason for doing this much less obvious — specifying, for instance, that you want to maintain an array of callback objects would make a better case for “needing” this capability. It is also a poor choice to use “T” like you did because this tends to imply template usage to most experienced C++ programmers. The thing that is most likely causing your “unexplained” crash is that assignment operator; if you don't define one the compiler will automatically generate one that works as a bitwise copy — almost certainly not what you want if your class is anything other than a collection of simple data types (POD). For this to work properly on a class of any complexity you will likely need to define a deep copy or use reference counting; in C++ it is almost always a poor choice to let the compiler create any of ctor, dtor, or assignment for you. And, of course, it would be a good idea to use standard containers rather than the simple array mechanism you implied by your example. In that case you should probably also define a default ctor, a virtual dtor, and a copy ctor because of the assumptions made by containers and algorithms. If, in fact, you do not want to create a copy of your object but want, instead, to invoke action() on the original object but from within an array, then you will need an array of pointers instead. Again working closely to your original example: <pre><code>typedef class MyActionableClass T; T** getGlobalPointer(); void AddInstance(T& objInstance) { T** arrayFromElsewhere = getGlobalPointer(); //ok, now at this point we have a reference to an object instance //and a pointer which we assume is at the base of an array of T **pointers** //whose first element we don't mind losing //**reference** the instance we've received by saving its address arrayFromElsewhere[0] = &objInstance; //now invoke the action() method on **the original instance** arrayFromElsewhere[0]->action(); </code></pre> } Note closely that arrayFromElsewhere is now an array of pointers to objects instead of an array of actual objects. Note that I dropped the const modifier in this case because I don’t know if action() is a const method — with a name like that I am assuming not… Note carefully the ampersand (address-of) operator being used in the assignment. Note also the new syntax for invoking the action() method by using the pointer-to operator. Finally be advised that using standard containers of pointers is fraught with memory-leak peril, but typically not nearly as dangerous as using naked arrays :-/
Tags
Title
singulars
PostAcceptedAnswerId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostParentId
1. POTrying to store an object in an array but then how to call that object's methods?
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTQuestion
PostTypePostTypeId
1. PTAnswer
UserLastEditorUserId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
UserOwnerUserId
1. USkai26873
plurals
PostLinksPostIdRelatedPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostLinksRelatedPostIdPostId
1. This table or related slice is empty.
PostsAcceptedAnswerId
1. POTrying to store an object in an array but then how to call that object's methods?
 singulars
 PostTypePostTypeId
 PTQuestion
PostsParentIdCreationDate
1. This table or related slice is empty.
VotesPostIdCreationDate
1. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTUpMod
2. VO
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 This table or related slice is empty.
 VoteTypeVoteTypeId
 VTAcceptedByOriginator
CommentsPostId
1. COThank you for this answer, you seem to understand what I was attempting to do. I think you were right about the automatic assignment operator, as evidenced by the successful compile and horrific crash. There was also some trouble with trying to use an abstract class, but I've got that sorted.
 singulars
 PostPostId
 PO
 UserUserId
 USRoger Halliburton

Querying!

Guidance

A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.