I have a class that has no default constructor or assignment operator so it is declared and initialized within an if/else statement depending on the result of another function. But then it says that it is out of scope later even though both routes of the conditional will create an instance.
Consider the following example (done with int
just to illustrate the point):
#include <iostream> int main() { if(1) { int i = 5; } else { int i = 0; } std::cout << i << std::endl; return 0; }
Do variables declared in a conditional go out of scope at the end of the conditional? What is the correct way to handle the situation where there is no default constructor but the arguments for the constructor depend on certain conditionals?
Edit
In light of the answers given, the situation is more complex so maybe the approach would have to change. There is an abstract base class A and two classes B and C that derive from A. How would something like this:
if(condition) { B obj(args); } else { C obj(args); }
change the approach? Since A is abstract, I couldn't just declare A* obj
and create the appropriate type with new
.
if is a conditional statement, which returns true or false based on the condition that is passed in it's expression. By default, if-statement is implemented on only one line, that follows it. But if we put block after the if-statement, it will be implemented on the whole block.
If you're new to the syntax that's used in the code sample, if (int i = 5) { is a perfectly valid way of declaring and defining a variable, then using it inside the given if statement. It allows us to write terser, clearer code, while also avoiding limiting the scope of a variable.
Yes. It is also true for for scope.
A scope is a region of the program and broadly speaking there are three places, where variables can be declared: Inside a function or a block which is called local variables, In the definition of function parameters which is called formal parameters.
"Do variables declared in a conditional go out of scope at the end of the conditional?"
Yes - the scope of a local variable only falls within enclosing brackets:
{ int x; //scope begins //... }//scope ends //x is not available here
In your case, say you have class A
.
If you're not dealing with pointers:
A a( condition ? 1 : 2 );
or if you're using a different constructor prototype:
A a = condition ? A(1) : A(2,3);
If you're creating the instance on the heap:
A* instance = NULL; if ( condition ) { instance = new A(1); } else { instance = new A(2); }
or you could use the ternary operator:
//if condition is true, call A(1), otherwise A(2) A* instance = new A( condition ? 1 : 2 );
EDIT:
Yes you could:
A* x = NULL; //pointer to abstract class - it works if ( condition ) x = new B(); else x = new C();
EDIT:
It seems what you're looking for is the factory pattern (look it up):
class A; //abstract class B : public A; class C : public A; class AFactory { public: A* create(int x) { if ( x == 0 ) return new B; if ( x == 1 ) return new C; return NULL; } };
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