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

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • 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 8841385
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 14, 20262026-06-14T10:42:15+00:00 2026-06-14T10:42:15+00:00

I have the following design problem: I have a Resource with two sorts of

  • 0

I have the following design problem:
I have a Resource with two sorts of accessors:

  • one is to modify it (let’s call it Access)
  • one is for const-like access (let’s call it Const_access), but you could say c1=c2 and then c1 will access c2.

Given that Resource is big, I have to achieve the following copy mechanism:

Access->Access:             deep copy
Access->Const_access:       deep copy
Const_access->Access:       deep copy
Const_access->Const_access: shallow copy

I aim to write Access so that Const_access will be able to use exactly the const functions in Access.
My current implementation is flawed, using:

class Access {
  public:
  Access(const Access&); // deep copy
  void method(const Access&); 
  void const_method() const; 
  protected: 
  Resource res;
};
class Const_access : public Access{
  private:
  void method(); // only declaration
  public:
  Const_access(const Const_accesss&); // shallow copy
  explicit Const_access(const Access&); // deep copy
};

but here Const_access ca; ca.Access::method() still works and I have to manually hide away the non-const accessors. I have tried protected or private inheritance but that prohibits flexibility for Access& to handle Const_Access& too.

What would be the correct solution for this problem?

  • 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
    2026-06-14T10:42:16+00:00Added an answer on June 14, 2026 at 10:42 am

    This problem can simply solved using so called lazy evaluation:
    making the private clone of the class resources only when a member function wants to modify it. R/W and Read-only access to resources is easily solved with private inheritance.

    This way also the LSP is abided: Obj is now flawlessly publicly inherited from Const_obj, if necessary at all.
    There is a link for the complete answer.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

There is a design problem like this. Suppose you have a set of class
I've got the following design problem: Say I have 1 million of plain text
I have a following design function crudDataTable() { this.addEditFormContainerSelector = ''; this.paginationType = full_numbers;
I have the following database design: Employee Table: Username, Name, DivisionCode Division Table: SapCode,
I have the following database design: Employee Table: Username, Name Quiz Table: QuizID, Title,
I am creating an App with following design: I have a UITableView with custom
I am in need of some guidance for the following design. I have a
I have troubles with the following database design (simplified for the example). It allows
Is there any name for the following DB table design: Basically we have generic
The following is using EF 5.0.0-rc and Code First. In my design, I have

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.