Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 501967
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 13, 20262026-05-13T06:14:38+00:00 2026-05-13T06:14:38+00:00

How would I best implement these? I thought of something like this: using namespace

  • 0

How would I best implement these? I thought of something like this:

    using namespace std;

    shape_container
    shape_container::clone_deep () const
    {
        shape_container* ptr = new shape_container();
        copy( data.begin(), data.end(), (*ptr).begin() );
        return *ptr;
    }

    shape_container
    shape_container::clone_shallow () const
    {
        return *( new shape_container(*this) );
    }

The member data is defined as follows:

    std::map<std::string, shape*> data;

This doesn’t work, unfortunately. Here’s the compiler errors, I don’t really understand them:

    g++ -Wall -O2 -pedantic -I../../UnitTest++/src/ -I./libfglwin/include/ -I. -c shape_container.cpp -o shape_container.o
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_pair.h: In member function ‘std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*>& std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*>::operator=(const std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*>&)’:
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_pair.h:69:   instantiated from ‘static _OI std::__copy<<anonymous>, <template-parameter-1-2> >::copy(_II, _II, _OI) [with _II = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, _OI = std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, bool <anonymous> = false, <template-parameter-1-2> = std::bidirectional_iterator_tag]’
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_algobase.h:315:   instantiated from ‘_OI std::__copy_aux(_II, _II, _OI) [with _II = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, _OI = std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >]’
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_algobase.h:340:   instantiated from ‘static _OI std::__copy_normal<<anonymous>, <anonymous> >::__copy_n(_II, _II, _OI) [with _II = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, _OI = std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, bool <anonymous> = false, bool <anonymous> = false]’
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_algobase.h:401:   instantiated from ‘_OutputIterator std::copy(_InputIterator, _InputIterator, _OutputIterator) [with _InputIterator = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, _OutputIterator = std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >]’
    shape_container.cpp:70:   instantiated from here
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_pair.h:69: error: non-static const member ‘const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> > std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*>::first’, can't use default assignment operator
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_algobase.h: In static member function ‘static _OI std::__copy<<anonymous>, <template-parameter-1-2> >::copy(_II, _II, _OI) [with _II = std::_Rb_tree_const_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, _OI = std::_Rb_tree_iterator<std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*> >, bool <anonymous> = false, <template-parameter-1-2> = std::bidirectional_iterator_tag]’:
    /usr/include/c++/4.2.1/bits/stl_algobase.h:268: note: synthesized method ‘std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*>& std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*>::operator=(const std::pair<const std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >, shape*>&)’ first required here 

Somehow this looks unnecessarily complicated to me. Is that
true and can I make it better?

BTW, I have clone() methods
in the classes I derived from shape. Perhaps I can use them
for the clone_deep method? Are they ok? They look something
like this:

    class shape
    {
        public:
            /* Many methods. */
            virtual shape* clone () const = 0;

        protected:
            colorRGB    color_;
            std::string name_;
    };

    class triangle2d : public shape
    {
        public:
            /* Many methods. */
            triangle2d* clone() const;
        private:
            point3d a_, b_, c_;
    };

    triangle2d*
    triangle2d::clone() const
    {
        return new triangle2d(*this);
    } 
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-13T06:14:38+00:00Added an answer on May 13, 2026 at 6:14 am

    Usually a clone function would return a pointer to a new instance. What you are returning is an object by value which is copy constructed from a dynamically allocated isntance that is then leaked.

    If you want to return by value then you should not use new.
    E.g.

    shape_container shape_container::clone_shallow () const
    {
        return *this;
    }
    

    If the data member is just a std::map instance, then it will be copied as part of your shallow clone in any case so there is no need to do the std::copy in the deep clone case, it’s not trying to do anything different.

    If you wanted to do a std::copy of a map you would need to use a std::insert_iterator.

    I think that it might be easier to do a clone of each shape after the fact, though.

    e.g.

    shape_container shape_container::clone_deep() const
    {
        shape_container ret(*this);
    
        for (std::map<std::string, shape*>::iterator i = ret.data.begin(); i != ret.data.end(); ++i)
        {
            i->second = i->second->clone();
        }
    
        return ret;
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

What would be the best way to implement a simple crash / error reporting
What would be the best way to implement, store, and render spherical worlds, such
I was wondering what would be the best strategy to implement a badges system
I'd like to implement a date picker using a calendar. Before I go ahead
How would the following scenario best be implemented: There is a standardized user interface
When requesting hardware for a WebLogic server, what hardware would best improve its performance?
I have the following situation I think would be best to show in sample
In Java, what would the best way be to have a constantly listening port
I was looking at WF and was wondering if it would be best to
What would be the best way to have a list of items with a

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.