std::for_each + break

[yurec]

Hi

I wanna give template method of library class with some predicate,
which I put to std::for_each in that method.How to break the
std::for_each with predicate?(exce ptions are used olny in exceptional
situations, as i know)

Thanks

[alan]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Nov 19, 8:12 pm, yurec <Yurij.Zha...@m aterialise.kiev .uawrote:

Hi
>
I wanna give template method of library class with some predicate,
which I put to std::for_each in that method.How to break the
std::for_each with predicate?(exce ptions are used olny in exceptional
situations, as i know)
>
Thanks

Perhaps you would be better served by std::find_if

[yurec]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Nov 19, 2:17 pm, alan <almkg...@gmail .comwrote:

On Nov 19, 8:12 pm, yurec <Yurij.Zha...@m aterialise.kiev .uawrote:
>

Hi

>

I wanna give template method of library class with some predicate,
which I put to std::for_each in that method.How to break the
std::for_each with predicate?(exce ptions are used olny in exceptional
situations, as i know)

>

Thanks

>
Perhaps you would be better served by std::find_if

For sure, thx

[James Kanze]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Nov 19, 1:12 pm, yurec <Yurij.Zha...@m aterialise.kiev .uawrote:

I wanna give template method of library class with some
predicate, which I put to std::for_each in that method.How to
break the std::for_each with predicate?(exce ptions are used
olny in exceptional situations, as i know)

You can't. That's precisely the point of for_each.

--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:james.kan ze@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientier ter Datenverarbeitu ng
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34

[Kira Yamato]

Re: std::for_each + break

On 2007-11-19 07:12:29 -0500, yurec <Yurij.Zhacun@m aterialise.kiev .uasaid:

Hi
>
I wanna give template method of library class with some predicate,
which I put to std::for_each in that method.How to break the
std::for_each with predicate?(exce ptions are used olny in exceptional
situations, as i know)
>
Thanks

I would think throwing an exception is a simple and elegant solution here.

Just because we have called a mechanism 'exception' and gave it the
connotation that it is for error-handling purposes, does not mean that
we can only use the mechanism as such and nothing else.

Ok, so some runtime cost is needed to setup try-catch blocks, but I'm
not sure scanning the list twice with find_if/for_each combo is
necessarily faster.

--

-kira

[yurec]

Re: std::for_each + break

/* doesn't compile :(
maybe somebody knows where is my mistake?

using namespace boost::lambda;
get_layout_func _map::const_ite rator iter_func =
std::find_if(na med_func_map.be gin(), named_func_map. end(),

bind(&IContextT oLayoutPred::Co mpare, ip_pred,

bind(&get_layou t_func_map::val ue_type::second , _1)));
*/

//compiles ok!
get_layout_func _map::const_ite rator iter_func =
named_func_map. begin();
const get_layout_func _map::const_ite rator iter_func_end =
named_func_map. end();
while (iter_func_end != iter_func)
{
if (true == ip_pred->Compare(iter_f unc->second))
break;

++iter_func;
}

[Sohail Somani]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 11:04:40 -0800, James Kanze wrote:

Anyone who wrote that at any place where I've ever worked would not be
allowed to touch the code again. Exceptions are NOT a flow control
mechanism.

You should look at the Boost Graph Library's visitor mechanism then. From
what I recall, it used exceptions to stop visiting something or the other.

:-)

--
Sohail Somani

http://uint32t.blogspot.com

[Kira Yamato]

Re: std::for_each + break

On 2007-11-20 14:04:40 -0500, James Kanze <james.kanze@gm ail.comsaid:

On Nov 20, 1:13 pm, Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherci...@gmx .netwrote:

>terminator wrote:

>>On Nov 20, 12:45 pm, Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherci...@gmx .netwrote:

>

>>>try {
>>>std::for_eac h( seq.begin(), seq.end(), throwing_predic ate_and_actio

n

>>>);
>>>}
>>>catch ( whatever ) {}

>
Anyone who wrote that at any place where I've ever worked would
not be allowed to touch the code again. Exceptions are NOT a
flow control mechanism.

Any boss who think like that I would not want to work for.

Exception is certainly a flow control mechanism. Essentially it is a
glorified longjmp with smart stack unwinding that invokes destructors.
If it looks like a duck and quakes like a duck, then it is a duck.

Now of course, the question remains when is the proper use of such type
of flow control. Is it *always* only valid for error handling purposes
and nothing else? That I cannot say I have enough experience to
answer, but I find it hard to believe that there is no other uses of an
inter-stackframe branching mechanism that is aware of cleaning up
objects in those frames, beside error handling.

But I like to bring up one possible use:

In some of the algorithm books I've been reading, many of them have
terminating statements (like 'return') nested deeply in nested loops.
So, once a certain terminating condition is reached, the entire
algorithm is done and exited. If the entire algorithm has been
implemented in a single function, then the 'return' statement is
sufficient to exit the algorithm. But what if helper functions were
used and that the terminating conditions are inside these helper
functions? In this case, you can either have the helper functions
return a terminating return code or you can have the main function
setup a try-catch block and let the helper function throw an exception.
Now imagine what if helper functions can have helper functions too.
Don't you think throwing an exception here is the easiest way to return
control to the main function?

Of course, some people believe that 'return' statements should never be
in the middle of a function. A good implementation of an algorithm
would have every control flow reach the last statement before the
function-ending braces. If this is your philosophy, then to you
exception-handling should be used for error-purposes only.

>
[...]

--

-kira

[Kira Yamato]

Re: std::for_each + break

On 2007-11-20 04:45:36 -0500, Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherciueh@gmx .netsaid:

Kira Yamato wrote:
>

>On 2007-11-19 07:12:29 -0500, yurec <Yurij.Zhacun@m aterialise.kiev .ua>
>said:
>>

>>Hi
>>>
>>I wanna give template method of library class with some predicate,
>>which I put to std::for_each in that method.How to break the
>>std::for_ea ch with predicate?(exce ptions are used olny in exceptional
>>situations, as i know)
>>>
>>Thanks

>>
>I would think throwing an exception is a simple and elegant solution here.

>
Simple and elegant? in this case?
>
Compare
>
try {
std::for_each( seq.begin(), seq.end(), throwing_predic ate_and_action );
}
catch ( whatever ) {}
>
to
>
for ( iterator_type iter = seq.begin();
iter != seq.end() && ! break_condition ( *iter );
++iter ) {
some_action( *iter );
}
>
I cannot say that I find the try-throw-catch version easier to grok or more
elegant.

Hmm. The for-loop code looks more explicit than the for_each. So, why
do we bother with for_each again?

Or I should ask, why would we ever prefer a statement over a block?

>
[...]
>

--

-kira

[Sohail Somani]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:51:12 -0500, Kira Yamato wrote:

Hmm. The for-loop code looks more explicit than the for_each. So, why
do we bother with for_each again?
>
Or I should ask, why would we ever prefer a statement over a block?

Because it is easier to understand statements than instructions. Compare:

namespace bl=boost::lambd a; http://www.boost.org/doc/html/lambda.html
....
std::transform( vec1.begin(),ve c1.end(),vec2.b egin(),bl::_1 + 1);

To:

for(int i = 0; i < vec1.size(); ++i)
{
vec2[i] = vec2[i] + 1;
}

Over time, given enough use of the C++ standard library, you can gain an
understanding of what code is doing by casual reading without having to
scrutinize what the code is doing at the instruction level. So in the
first example, it is obvious from reading a single line of code, that
someone is intending to add 1 to each element in a vector and assign it
to another. I need to read and grok 5 lines for the second version.

At least that is my 2 minute explanation!

--
Sohail Somani

http://uint32t.blogspot.com

[alan]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Nov 20, 11:31 pm, yurec <Yurij.Zha...@m aterialise.kiev .uawrote:

/* doesn't compile :(
maybe somebody knows where is my mistake?
>
using namespace boost::lambda;
get_layout_func _map::const_ite rator iter_func =
std::find_if(na med_func_map.be gin(), named_func_map. end(),
>
bind(&IContextT oLayoutPred::Co mpare, ip_pred,
>
bind(&get_layou t_func_map::val ue_type::second , _1)));
*/

Try creating a simple member function that returns the member data
'second' of a get_layout_func _map:
<your return type hereget_layout_ func_map::get_s econd(){
return second;
}

then replace get_layout_func _map::value_typ e::second with
get_layout_func _map::get_secon d. As an aside, you might also
profitably add "inline" to the above member function, if you take care
to add the definition to the header file.

get_layout_func _map::value_typ e may not exist in your
get_layout_func _map class, and even if it does, it might not have a
member called second. Did you (or who created get_layout_func _map, or
one of its public base types) write such a member?

boost::bind requires the first argument to be either function or a
function object (i.e. belonging to a class that overloads the ()
operator or function call operator)

>
//compiles ok!
get_layout_func _map::const_ite rator iter_func =
named_func_map. begin();
const get_layout_func _map::const_ite rator iter_func_end =
named_func_map. end();
while (iter_func_end != iter_func)
{
if (true == ip_pred->Compare(iter_f unc->second))
break;
>
++iter_func;
}

This seems quite clear enough; using boost::bind may just make things
look more horrible.

[alan]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Nov 21, 4:51 am, Kira Yamato <kira...@earthl ink.netwrote:

On 2007-11-20 04:45:36 -0500, Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherci...@gmx .netsaid:
>
>
>

Kira Yamato wrote:

>

On 2007-11-19 07:12:29 -0500, yurec <Yurij.Zha...@m aterialise.kiev .ua>
said:

>

>Hi

>

>I wanna give template method of library class with some predicate,
>which I put to std::for_each in that method.How to break the
>std::for_eac h with predicate?(exce ptions are used olny in exceptional
>situations, as i know)

>

>Thanks

>

I would think throwing an exception is a simple and elegant solution here.

>

Simple and elegant? in this case?

>

Compare

>

try {
std::for_each( seq.begin(), seq.end(), throwing_predic ate_and_action );
}
catch ( whatever ) {}

>

to

>

for ( iterator_type iter = seq.begin();
iter != seq.end() && ! break_condition ( *iter );
++iter ) {
some_action( *iter );
}

>

I cannot say that I find the try-throw-catch version easier to grok or more
elegant.

>
Hmm. The for-loop code looks more explicit than the for_each. So, why
do we bother with for_each again?

So we won't have to bother with iterators, which are just pointers in
pretty clothes?

>
Or I should ask, why would we ever prefer a statement over a block?
>
>
>

[...]

>
--
>
-kira

[Sohail Somani]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:26:10 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

>std::transform (vec1.begin(),v ec1.end(),vec2. begin(),bl::_1 + 1);
>>
>To:
>>
>for(int i = 0; i < vec1.size(); ++i)
>{
> vec2[i] = vec2[i] + 1;
>}
>>

>
The second code snippet is by far most clear and at-a-glance.
>
However, it caused me to look twice because it's so non-idiomatic,
Pascal style that at first glance one thinks there must be some reason
for that, that it doesn't do what it seems to: in C++ we use ++.

Sure! You also managed to miss the deliberate bug which was part of the
point :-)

--
Sohail Somani

http://uint32t.blogspot.com

[Sohail Somani]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 23:55:43 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:

* Sohail Somani:

>On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 23:03:46 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>>

Then I guess that in your view the first snippet defined the wished for
effect, and the second had a "bug" in the sense that it didn't do the
same?
>
If so, then you're suffering from the "others should read my mind"
syndrome.

Dude chill. If you read the rest of the email, I did concede that! In
fact, its the next line you quote:

>but I suppose the example wasn't full enough. I'll let you off this
>time.

[snip]

Grumble,

And how!

--
Sohail Somani

http://uint32t.blogspot.com

[Sohail Somani]

Re: std::for_each + break

On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:18:24 -0800, Kai-Uwe Bux wrote:

However, it does not actually present any data in support of the claim
that generic algorithms tend to introduce the kind of bug you pointed
out.

I'm done with this thread, but I just want to point out that there was no
bug. That is an intended mode of use for std::transform: Perform an
operation on each element in an array and assign it to another.

--
Sohail Somani

http://uint32t.blogspot.com