pedim - 1 year ago 65

C++ Question

Suppose I have a Matrix class and I'd like to initialize my Matrix objects in two ways:

`Matrix a = {1,2,3} // for a row vector`

and

`Matrix b = {{1,2,3},{4,5,6},{7,8,9}} // for a matrix`

As a result, I implemented two copy constructors as below

`class Matrix {`

private:

size_t rows, cols;

double* mat;

public:

Matrix() {}

Matrix(initializer_list<double> row_vector) { ... }

Matrix(initializer_list< initializer_list<double> > matrix) { ... }

...

}

No matter how I change my interface, such as adding an

`explicit`

`Matrix(initializer_list< vector<double> > matrix)`

`Matrix a = {1,2,3};n`

Matrix b = {{1}, {2}, {3}};

I'm not quite familiar with the stuff like direct/copy initialization or implicit type conversion. Are there any solutions for this problem?

Recommended for you: Get network issues from **WhatsUp Gold**. **Not end users.**

Answer Source

There is no solution which will unambiguously work in every case. However, you can create ways to disambiguate cases:

```
template<typename T>
auto il(std::initializer_list<T> the_il) -> std::initializer_list<T> { return the_il; }
Matrix b = {il({1}), {2}, {3}};
```

However, I would personally suggest that you be explicit about it. If a user wants a matrix containing one row, then it should look like a *matrix* containing one row, not like a vector:

```
Matrix a = {{1,2,3}};
```

So I would suggest ditching the first overload altogether.

Recommended from our users: **Dynamic Network Monitoring from WhatsUp Gold from IPSwitch**. ** Free Download**