Initialising a struct that contains a vector of itself

I have a menu system that I want to initialise from constant data. A 开发者_开发百科MenuItem can contain, as a sub-menu, a vector of MenuItems. But it only works up to a point. Here are the bare bones of the problem:

#include <vector>
struct S { std::vector<S> v ; } ;

S s1 = { } ;
S s2 = { { } } ;
S s3 = { { { } } } ;

g++ -std=c++0x (version 4.4.5) copes with s1 and s2, but s3 comes back with:

prog.cpp:6:22: error: template argument 1 is invalid

(see ideone). Am I doing something wrong?

GMan is correct in his comment: in the declaration of S::v in your code, S is still incomplete. A type must be complete to be usable as the value type in an STL container. For more information see Matt Austern's article "The Standard Librarian: Containers of Incomplete Types."

If you were to switch to a container that is usable with an incomplete type, then your code is fine. For example, given the following:

#include <initializer_list>

template <typename T>
struct Container
{
    Container() { }
    Container(std::initializer_list<T>) { }
};

struct S { Container<S> v; };

then your original initialization should work fine:

S s3 = { { { } } } ;

This would work too:

S s4 = { { { { { { { { { { { { { { { { /*zomg*/ } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } };

boost::optional and boost::recursive_wrapper look useful for this

struct S { // one brace
    boost::optional< // another brace
      boost::recursive_wrapper< // another brace
        std::vector< // another brace
          S
        >
      >
    > v; 
};

You need 4 braces for every submenu you add. Brace elision does not happen when constructor calls are involved. For example

S m{{{{ 
  {{{{ }}}}, 
  {{{{ 
    {{{{ }}}}, 
    {{{{ }}}} 
  }}}} 
}}}}; 

Honestly, using constructors look more readable

struct S {
    // this one is not really required by C++0x, but some GCC versions
    // require it.
    S(char const *s)
    :v(s) { } 

    S(std::string const& s)
    :v(s) { }

    S(std::initialize_list<S> s)
    :v(std::vector<S>(s)) { } 

    boost::variant<
      std::string,
      boost::recursive_wrapper<
        std::vector<
          S
        >
      >
    > v; 
};

Now it simplifies to

S s{ 
  "S1", 
  {
    "SS1",
    "SS2",
    { "SSS1", "SSS2" }
  }
};

what you are trying to do is an upcomingcurrent feature of C++ called "initializer lists", where a vector or list can be initialized with = { }. I don't know if they have come out with it in TR1 or not. maybe it's in TR2.

#include <vector>
#include <list>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(void) {
    vector<int> vi = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
    list<int> li = {5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0};
    cout<<"vector size="<<vi.size()<<", list size="<<li.size()<<endl;
    return 0;
}

the code you are using doesn't look proper to me. If you want to implement structures that contain structures (a tree), include a list of pointers to the structures/nodes (or just void pointers if that's not implementable) within the node.

most menu structures are essentially an ordered list-based tree (n nodes in one place, but could be m nodes elsewhere, etc). Robert Sedgewick makes a textbook "Algorithms in C++".

#include <vector>
#include <iterator>
#include <string>
void * pRoot = NULL; //pointer to CTree
class CTreenode;
class CTree;
class CTree {
    public:
        vector<class CTreeNode> lctnNodeList; //list does not have at() or operator[]
        vector<class CTreeNode>::iterator lctni;
    public:
        CTree() {}
        ~CTree() {
            for (lctni=lctnNodeList.begin(); lctni != lctnNodeList.end(); nctni++) {
                if (NULL==lctni->getChildPtr()) {
                    //do nothing, we have already done all we can
                } else {
                    delete (CTree *)lctnNodeList.pChild;
                }
                //do action here
            }
        }
        void addToList(string& data, CTree * p) { 
            CTreeNode ctn(data, p);
            lctnNodeList.push_back(d); 
        }
        void eraseAt(size_t index) { 
            vector<class CTreeNode>::iterator i = lctnNodeList.begin();
            vector<class CTreeNode>::iterator i2 = lctnNodeList.begin();
            i2++;
            size_t x;
            for (x=0; x <= index; x++,i++,i2++) {
                if (index == x) {
                    lctnNodeList.erase(i,i2);
                    break;
                }
            }
        }
        void at(size_t index, string& returndata, CTree * &p) { 
            vector<class CTreeNode>::iterator i = lctnNodeList.begin();
            size_t x;
            for (x=0; x <= index; i++,x++) {
                if (x==index) {
                     i->getData(returndata, p);
                     break;
                }
            }
        }
        const CTreeNode& operator[](const size_t idx) {
            if (idx < lctnNodeList(size)) {
                return lctnNodeList.at(idx);
            } else {
                //throw an error
            }
        }
        const size() {
            return lctnNodeList.size();
        }
        //this can be applied to the root of the tree (pRoot).
        doActionToThisSubtree(void * root) {
            CTree * pct = (CTree *)root;
            for (pct->lctni=pct->lctnNodeList.begin(); pct->lctni != pct->lctnNodeList.end(); pct->nctni++) {
                //this is a depth-first traversal.
                if (NULL==pct->lctni->getChildPtr()) {
                    //do nothing, we have already done all we can
                    //we do this if statement to prevent infinite recursion
                } else {
                    //at this point, recursively entering child domain
                    doActionToThisSubtree(pct->lctni->getChildPtr());
                    //at thisd point, exiting child domain
                }
                //do Action on CTreeNode node pct->lctni-> here.
            }
        }
};
class CTreeNode {
    public:
        CTree * pChild; //CTree *, may have to replace with void *
        string sData;
    public:
        CTreeNode() : pChild(NULL) {}
        CTreeNode(string& data, pchild) : pChild(pchild) {
            sData = data;
        }
        ~CTreeNode() { 
             if (NULL!=pChild) { 
                 delete pChild;//delete (CTree *)pChild; 
                 pChild = NULL; 
             }
        void getChild(CTreeNode& child) { 
            child = *pChild;//child = *((CTree *)pChild); 
        }
        bool addChild(string& s) { 
            if (NULL==pChild) {
                return false;
            } else {
                pChild = new CTree;
            }
            return true;
        }
        void * getChildPtr() { return pChild; }
        void getData(string& data, CTree * &p) { //not sure about how to put the & in there on CTree
            data=sData;
            p = pChild;
        }
        void setData(string& data, CTree * p) {
            sData=data;
            pChild = p;
        }
};

the problem is mutual dependency here, and I think I have it resolved with the class declaration. do class CTreeNode; before class CTree {}. http://www.codeguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=383253

I am probably mangling this code, and it's incomplete, because I haven't had the need to write a tree in years, but I think I've covered the basics. I didn't implement operator[].