The problem was a stupid error from another class accessing the vector and deleting iterators. Nothing to do with the code below. Sorry to waste your time.
I must be missing something elementary. I've got a function which creates an object, manipulates it's data and then pushes it into a vector. The moment the function exits, the program crashes with a SIGSEV, and I'm left staring at (Kdevelop gcc 4.5 gdb) :
/**
* The dtor only erases the elements, and note that if the
* elements themselves are pointers, the pointed-to memory is
* not touched in any way. Managing the pointer is the user's
* responsibility.
*/
~vector()
{ std::_Destroy(this->_M_impl._M_start, this->_M_impl._M_finish,
_M_get_Tp_allocator()); }
I am not storing pointers, I'm trying to store instantiated objects.
void Init::initIndividual(int ID, int gen)
{
Individual temp_person = Individual(ID,gen);
int inst_size = getRandom<int>(1,max_inst_size);
for (int k=0;k<inst_size;k++)
{
retry:
// (1) randomly choose a body part
int body_num = getRandom<int>(1,20);
body_part temp_part = get_body_part(body_num);
// NOTE: We need to make sure that the body part is unique!
std::vector<Instruction> already_existing = temp_person.get_instructions();
if (already_existing.size() > 0)
{
for (int a=0; a< already_existing.size();a++)
{
std::string name = already_existing[a].get_body_part();
if ( name.compare(temp_part.name) == 0 )
{ //if body part already exists in the list, retry!
goto retry;
}
}
}
// (2) Create a new Instruction for this body part
Instruction temp_inst = Instruction(temp_part.name,temp_part.max_angle,temp_part.min_angle);
// (3) Randomly pick a number of body parameters to use
int paramsize = getRandom<int>(1,max_params_size);
// (4) Randomly choose time and degree trajectory parameters for this body part and append!
for (int x=0;x < paramsize; x++)
{
float time = 0.0f;
int choice = 0;
// (4.a) If begin of body parameters
if (x==0)
{
//if always start at time = 0
if (static_time_init)
{
time = 0.0f;
}
//if randomly choose the init time
else if (!static_time_init)
{
time = getRandom<float>(0.0f,(float)(time_constrain-1));
}
}
// (4.b) if not @ start of params
else if(x!=0)
{
redo:
float previous_time = temp_inst.parameters.back().time; //get previous time
double incrementor = getRandom<double>(0.1,1.0); //increment time by min 0.1 max 1.0
time = previous_time + (float)incrementor;
if (time > time_constrain) //if current time is more than time constrain, redo
{
goto redo;
}
}
// (5) Randomly pick a degree to move to (within body part constrains)
float degree = getRandom<float>(temp_inst.get_min_angle(),temp_inst.get_max_angle());
Parameter foo = Parameter(time,degree);
temp_inst.add_parameter(Parameter(time,degree));
}
temp_person.add_Instruction(temp_inst);
}
temp_person.endtime = time_constrain;
}
That is the entire function.
std::vector<Individual> population;
Doesn't the push_back function copy the object when pushing it back ? Is the destructor invoked because push_back is trying to destroy temp_person ? I have not defined a copy operator in class Individual. I have run into this problem before and never figured it out. Does this happen because at the end of the function temp_person is out of scope ? Thank you !
Edit: Class Individual
class Individual
{
friend class Population;
friend class Crossover;
friend class Init;
private:
std::string xml_file;
char *arg4;
protected:
bool saved, mutated, dead;
unsigned int UID, generation;
int executions;
std::vector<Instruction> instructions;
int father_UID, mother_UID;
double eta,endtime;
public:
int uniform;
float fitness;
pthread_mutex_t thread_mutex;
//Some other functions irrelevant
Please note, that the vector of instructions has another vector of structs.
class Instruction
{
friend class Crossover;
private:
unsigned int param_size;
float max_angle, min_angle;
bool micro_mutated;
public:
std::string body_part;
std::vector<Parameter> parameters;
//other stuff
class Parameter
{
public:
float time;
float degree;
Parameter(float t,float d);
};
Nothing crazy here.
Could this be a problem of a shallow copy obtained by the population.push_back ?
pthread_mutex_t thread_mutex;
Copying a pthread_mutex_t
is not meaningful. I'd wager that's part of the problem. I have suspicions about your char*
too; who owns it?
My justification as to why I believe pthread_mutex_t
can't be copied: the only documented way to obtain an initialized mutex is from using pthread_mutex_init
. Additionally, all the pthread_mutex_*
functions manipulate mutexes using pass-by-pointer (unlike e.g. pthread_thread_t
).
Doesn't the push_back function copy the object when pushing it back ?
Yes, it does.
Is the destructor invoked because push_back is trying to destroy temp_person?
No, it is not. It is called because the temp object is destroyed at the end of the function.
I have not defined a copy operator in class Individual.
Let us see the declaration of the class.
Does this happen because at the end of the function temp_person is out of scope ?
Yes, the temp object is destroyed, but if the class is OK, this should not be a problem. Again - we need to see the code.
I bet it's something with the constructor/destructor (:
By the way, is population
global? Outch!
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With