class C
{
public:
C() : arr({1,2,3}) //doesn't compile
{}
/*
C() : arr{1,2,3} //doesn't compile either
{}
*/
private:
int arr[3];
};
I believe the reason is that arrays can be initialized only with = syntax, that is:
int arr[3] = {1,3,4};
P.S. Please do not mention vectors, boost::arrays, and their superiority to arrays, which I am well aware of.
This question is related to
c++
c++11
initializer-list
ctor-initializer
aggregate-initialization
- How can I do what I want to do (that is, initialize an array in a constructor (not assigning elements in the body)). Is it even possible?
Yes. It's using a struct that contains an array. You say you already know about that, but then I don't understand the question. That way, you do initialize an array in the constructor, without assignments in the body. This is what boost::array does.
Does the C++03 standard say anything special about initializing aggregates (including arrays) in ctor initializers? Or the invalidness of the above code is a corollary of some other rules?
A mem-initializer uses direct initialization. And the rules of clause 8 forbid this kind of thing. I'm not exactly sure about the following case, but some compilers do allow it.
struct A {
char foo[6];
A():foo("hello") { } /* valid? */
};
See this GCC PR for further details.
Do C++0x initializer lists solve the problem?
Yes, they do. However your syntax is invalid, I think. You have to use braces directly to fire off list initialization
struct A {
int foo[3];
A():foo{1, 2, 3} { }
A():foo({1, 2, 3}) { } /* invalid */
};
In C++03, aggregate initialization only applies with syntax similar as below, which must be a separate statement and doesn't fit in a ctor initializer.
T var = {...};
Workaround:
template<class T, size_t N>
struct simple_array { // like std::array in C++0x
T arr[N];
};
class C : private simple_array<int, 3>
{
static simple_array<int, 3> myarr() {
simple_array<int, 3> arr = {1,2,3};
return arr;
}
public:
C() : simple_array<int, 3>(myarr()) {}
};
You want to init an array of ints in your constructor? Point it to a static array.
class C
{
public:
int *cArray;
};
C::C {
static int c_init[]{1,2,3};
cArray = c_init;
}
How about
...
C() : arr{ {1,2,3} }
{}
...
?
Compiles fine on g++ 4.8
C++98 doesn't provide a direct syntax for anything but zeroing (or for non-POD elements, value-initializing) the array. For that you just write C(): arr() {}.
I thing Roger Pate is wrong about the alleged limitations of C++0x aggregate initialization, but I'm too lazy to look it up or check it out, and it doesn't matter, does it? EDIT: Roger was talking about "C++03", I misread it as "C++0x". Sorry, Roger. ?
A C++98 workaround for your current code is to wrap the array in a struct and initialize it from a static constant of that type. The data has to reside somewhere anyway. Off the cuff it can look like this:
class C
{
public:
C() : arr( arrData ) {}
private:
struct Arr{ int elem[3]; };
Arr arr;
static Arr const arrData;
};
C::Arr const C::arrData = {{1, 2, 3}};
Source: Stackoverflow.com