Question

See the code below – I want to know how to, or if it is even possible to, write the body of A::DoThisOrThat()

class A
{
  void DoThis( void ) { // any function body you like... }
  void DoThat( void ) { // any function body you like... }

  void DoThisOrThat( const bool doThis );
};

void A::DoThisOrThat( const bool doThis )
{
    void (*pMemberFunction)( void );
    pMemberFunction = doThis? &A::DoThis : &A::DoThat;

    (*pMemberFunction)();    // member function invoked controlled by parameter
}

All three lines of this function may need rewriting to correctly scope the member function. As written, I get a calling convention conflict on the second line where I assign pMemberFunction. I cannot lay my hands on a simple example clarifying this – all the examples easily found declare a member variable to hold the member function pointer. Can I not just create a local variable to do the same?

Answer 1

I might be missing something, but isn’t it much easier and simpler to do this?

void A::DoThisOrThat(bool doThis) 
{ 
    if(doThis) { DoThis(); }
    else       { DoThat(); }
}

Assuming you really want to go the function pointer route, realize that pointer to member functions are completely different beasts from pointers to non-member functions. One of the ways they are different is that you need to provide an object for the function to invoke upon. The syntax is as follows:

void A::DoThisOrThat(bool doThis) 
{ 
    void (A::*pMemberFunction)();
    pMemberFunction = doThis ? &A::DoThis : &A::DoThat;
    (this->*pMemberFunction)();
} 

Note that when declaring a pointer to member function, you have to also specify the class (note the A::*) and the object (note the this->*). Also remember that when forming pointers to members you have to fully qualify the function name, even within the class, and use the ampersand (e.g. &A::DoThis, which you’ve correctly done).