Deriving from standard container iterators

Question

I have a class which has a private collection of std::shared_ptrs, like:

class Foo
{
private:
     using Bars = std::vector<std::shared_ptr<Bar>>;
     Bars items_;
}

Given an instance of Foo, I want to be able to iterate over the Bar objects in items_ directly - hiding that the collection actually contains pointers. I believe the only thing that needs to change from Bars::const_iterator is operator*, is it ok to just derive from it and implement operator*? i.e.

class Iterator : public Bars::const_iterator
{
public:
    Iterator(Bars::const_iterator it) : Bars::const_iterator {it} {}

    const string& operator*() const
    {
        return *Bars::const_iterator::operator*();
    }
};

And then provide begin and end methods for Foo:

Foo::Iterator Foo::begin() const noexcept { return Iterator {std::cbegin(items_)}; }
Foo::Iterator Foo::end()   const noexcept { return Iterator {std::cend(items_)}; }

You can safely derive from nearly any class, provided that the inheritance is private. You will need using declarations to re-export members you want to be accessible. — n. m. could be an AI
– n. m. could be an AI, Commented Feb 4, 2016 at 17:19

score 3 · Accepted Answer · 2016-02-04 18:53:15Z

For flexibility you may just write an adapter:

#include <type_traits>

template <typename Iterator>
class random_access_pointer_iterator
{
    // Types
    // =====

    public:
    typedef Iterator iterator_type;
    typedef std::random_access_iterator_tag iterator_category;
    using difference_type = typename iterator_type::difference_type;
    using pointer = decltype(&**std::declval<iterator_type>());
    using value_type = typename std::remove_pointer<pointer>::type;
    typedef value_type& reference;

    // Construction
    // ============

    public:
    explicit random_access_pointer_iterator(iterator_type iterator)
    :   m_iterator(iterator)
    {}

    // Element Access
    // ==============

    public:
    const iterator_type& base() const { return m_iterator; }
    iterator_type& base() { return m_iterator; }
    operator iterator_type () const { return m_iterator; }

    // Iterator
    // ========

    public:
    reference operator * () const { return **m_iterator; }
    pointer operator -> () const { return &(**m_iterator); }

    random_access_pointer_iterator& operator ++ () {
        ++m_iterator;
        return *this;
    }
    random_access_pointer_iterator operator ++ (int) {
        random_access_pointer_iterator tmp(*this);
        ++m_iterator;
        return tmp;

    }
    random_access_pointer_iterator& operator += (difference_type n) {
        m_iterator += n;
        return *this;
    }

    random_access_pointer_iterator& operator -- () {
        --m_iterator;
        return *this;
    }
    random_access_pointer_iterator operator -- (int) {
        random_access_pointer_iterator tmp(*this);
        --m_iterator;
        return tmp;
    }

    random_access_pointer_iterator& operator -= (difference_type n) {
        m_iterator -= n;
        return *this;
    }

    private:
    iterator_type m_iterator;
};

template <typename Iterator>
inline random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator> operator + (
    random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator> i,
    typename random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type n) {
    return i += n;
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator> operator - (
    random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator> i,
    typename random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type n) {
    return i -= n;
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline typename random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>::difference_type
operator - (
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& a,
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& b) {
    return a.base() - b.base();
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline bool operator == (
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& a,
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& b) {
    return a.base() == b.base();
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline bool operator != (
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& a,
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& b) {
    return a.base() != b.base();
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline bool operator <  (
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& a,
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& b) {
    return a.base() <  b.base();
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline bool operator <= (
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& a,
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& b) {
    return a.base() <= b.base();
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline bool operator >  (
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& a,
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& b) {
    return a.base() >  b.base();
}

template <typename Iterator>
inline bool operator >= (
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& a,
    const random_access_pointer_iterator<Iterator>& b) {
    return a.base() >= b.base();
}


#include <cassert>
#include <memory>
#include <vector>

int main() {
    using vector = std::vector<std::shared_ptr<int>>;
    auto p = std::make_shared<int>(0);
    vector v = { p };

    using iterator = random_access_pointer_iterator<vector::iterator>;
    iterator a(v.begin());
    iterator b(v.end());

    assert(*a == 0);
    assert(a.operator -> () == &*p);
    ++a;
    assert(a == b);
    --a;
    assert(a != b);
    assert(a++ != b);
    assert(a-- == b);
    assert(a + 1 == b);
    assert(a == b - 1);
    assert(b - a == 1);
    assert(a <  b);
    assert(a <= b);
    assert(b >  a);
    assert(b >= a);
}

Having this, you can use any random access iterator (vector, deque, ... ) and use any pointer type (raw pointer, shared_ptr, ...)

Note: In your case - when you derive from the iterator of the vector you will have to adjust the type definitions, too.

Note: I do not like 'random_access_pointer_iterator', but I have nothing better on my mind.

Pete Becker · Accepted Answer · 2016-02-04 19:29:28Z

3

While most types in the standard library are not designed to be derived from, in this case it should be okay. The two dangers of inheritance are slicing and non-virtual destruction; for iterators these just aren't going to happen. No slicing because iterators are passed as template arguments, so the exact type is always used, and no non-virtual destruction because nobody in their right mind will create copies of iterators on the free store and delete them through a pointer to the base type (assuming they can figure out what it is).

EDIT: as Dieter Lücking points out, you'll also need to provide a typedef for iterator_type that matches your type:

typedef Iterator iterator_type;

EDIT: as Dieter Lücking points out, this one alone is not sufficient. You're providing an operator*, and need to provide all the typedefs that refer to the return type of that operator.

edited Feb 4, 2016 at 19:29

answered Feb 4, 2016 at 16:59

Pete Becker

77.2k8 gold badges82 silver badges171 bronze badges

4 Comments

user2249683 Over a year ago

No not that typedef, you need pointer, value_type and reference

Pete Becker Over a year ago

@DieterLücking - aren't the ones inherited from the base class sufficient?

user2249683 Over a year ago

No, the value_type is shared_ptr<T>, but the iterator returns T

Pete Becker Over a year ago

@DieterLücking - yes, of course. operator* is overloaded. Although the typedef for iterator_type is also needed.

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Deriving from standard container iterators

2 Answers 2

Comments

4 Comments

Your Answer

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

2 Answers 2

Comments

4 Comments

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Related