I have the following:
typedef std::function<bool (const std::string&)> SomethingCoolCb;
class ClassA
{
public:
void OnSomethingCool(const SomethingCoolCb& cb)
{
_cb = cb;
}
private:
SomethingCoolCb _cb;
};
class ClassB
{
public:
ClassB();
bool Juggle(const std::string& arg);
private:
ClassA _obj;
};
and I want to specify the ClassB::Juggle() member function as the callback to ClassB::_obj. Would the proper way to do that in C++11 be (in ClassB's constructor):
ClassB::ClassB()
{
_obj.OnDoSomethingCool(
[&](const std::string& arg) -> bool
{
return Juggle(arg);
});
}
From what I understand, the compiler will make a std::function object out of the above lambda code. So when the callback gets invoked, it'll call the std::function::operator() member and then it'll invoke ClassB::Juggle() instead of invoking ClassB::Juggle() directly. Unless I'm mistaken about what happens under the covers, that all seems to be a little inefficient. Is there a better way?
Only use std::function
if you really need polymorphic functions. Otherwise make it a template.
To adapt a member function to a functor use std::mem_fn
and then bind
an object to the first argument, the resulting functor can serve as your callback.
Sample:
#include <string>
#include <functional>
template<typename F>
class ClassA
{
public:
ClassA(F f) : _cb(f) {}
private:
F _cb;
};
class ClassB
{
public:
ClassB()
: _obj(std::bind(&ClassB::Juggle, this,
std::placeholders::_1))
{}
bool Juggle(const std::string& arg) {return true;}
private:
ClassA<decltype(std::bind(
std::declval<bool (ClassB::*)(const std::string&)>()
, std::declval<ClassB*>()
, std::placeholders::_1
) ) > _obj;
};
int main()
{
ClassB b;
return 0;
}
This side-steps the cost of function at the cost of being horribly ugly.
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