The reason why Java has the bean API is to ensure that the caller does not delete the object when setting it.

void setX(String val){

if (val == null) return;

this.x = val;

}

This is not necessary in C++, since the parent object owns the memory of the child object.  The equivalent C++ code would be simple

o.x = val;

If you want to do validation (see my earlier posts about regex validation) use a subclass that does the validation in its constructor and assignment operator.

I am currently working with a long block of code that uses && (logical and) to a long list of functions. The idea is to run all of the functions and short circuit if any of them fail. The problem is that there is no consistant mechanism for error reportin. If any of the functions fail, I have no way of knowing which one. This is my planned approach.

#include <iostream>
#include <stdexcept>
using namespace std;

bool invert(bool val){
return !val;
}

#define attempt( X ){ if (!X){ throw runtime_error(#X);}}

int main(){
cout << “OK” << endl;
try{
attempt(invert(true));
}catch(runtime_error& re){
cout << “runtime_error exception:” << re.what() <<endl;
}
return 0;
}

Using a non-virtual method in C++ is syntactic sugar:  It doesn’t allow you to do anything you could not as easily do BY using a static member function and passing in the object instance as the first parameter.  If you don’t fully qualify the name of the function, the type checking of the first parameter will make sure you call the right version, or at least get a compilation error until you do fully qualify.The only reason you would need to use one is for template programming, where some classes have the method you wish to call as a virtual, and you want to be consistent across all classes passed to the template.

This is not to say that all non-virtual functions are bad, just an observation about what the language  provides.

I understand now why so many people that have cut their teeth on C coding in Unix/Linux hate C++.  A coder can get her job done in C without needing significant tool support.  An editor, a build toolchain, and limited reverse engineering support a-la objdump and you are good to go.  Tag support makes navigation a lot easier, and suddenly, you have decent productivity.

When I started in the professional world, I learned C++ using Microsoft Visual Studio.  I had, prior to then, been a big fan of Borland for Pascal, and had even purchased a copy of Borland C++.  But, unlike the MS product, it did not then have an integrated debugger, and my learning curve was quite steep.  MSVC took me through the steps, provided decent navigation, and easy to use wizards for MS technology.  I did have the frustration of trying to work through libraries without having the source code, but this wasn’t the VC developers fault.

When I left the MS world for the Java world, the first thing I noticed was the lack of an IDE.  I was just so productive with all of the tools integrated, that it took me a while to get used to coding in EMACS. I had long since learned the value of stepping through code after I wrote it to make sure it was doing what I expected. Using gdb, while effective, was much slower than an integrated debugger.  It wasn’t until I got my hands on Intellij’s Idea that I felt a return to the productivity I had under MSVC.

When refactoring support hit in Eclipse, I was stunned at the ease of maintaining code.  I can’t say enough about this, and may try to recreate some of my earlier writings on Refactoring in order to show how valuable the approach can be.  Suffice to say, it is now a go-to tool for coding that I miss when forced to do without.

Now I am trying to figure out how best to do C++ development on Linux.  etags just does not handle context well enough, and CScope’s navigation is fairly clunky.  I’ve got a demo of Visual Slickedit, and the Eclipse platform with C/C++ support built in, but I have yet to find a smooth working environment.  My problem comes from dealing with an alien code base, tightly coupled dependencies and byzantine makefiles that I haven’t had time to spelunk.  I’ve not been able to get automated refactoring support to work and even base navigation is problematic.  As I work out the solution, I will  record my approaches here so that I will be able to recreate them in the future.