A class that represents a key combination
For a little game of mine I have created a Key.h file that should allow representation of a key press combination. A key combination is basically some key represented by it's virtual key code stored in int _keyand the state of modifier keys - shift, control, alt and windows keys. In case that key combination is used for typing, the key also stores the character that it should produce in _c.
class Key
{
private:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
int _key;
char _c;
public:
constexpr Key()
:
_shift(),
_ctrl(),
_alt(),
_win(),
_key(),
_c()
{}
constexpr Key(const Key& key)
:
_shift(key._shift),
_ctrl(key._ctrl),
_alt(key._alt),
_win(key._win),
_key(key._key),
_c(key._c)
{}
constexpr Key(bool shift, bool ctrl, bool alt, bool win, int key, char c)
:
_shift(shift),
_ctrl(ctrl),
_alt(alt),
_win(win),
_key(key),
_c(c)
{}
Key& operator= (Key& key)
{
_shift = key._shift;
_ctrl = key._ctrl;
_alt = key._alt;
_win = key._win;
_key = key._key;
_c = key._c;
}
bool operator== (const Key& key) const
{
return (_shift == key._shift && _ctrl == key._ctrl && _alt == key._alt && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
}
bool operator!= (const Key& key) const
{
return !(*this == key);
}
};
Are there any design flaws or some obvious things that I'm missing?
c++
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
For a little game of mine I have created a Key.h file that should allow representation of a key press combination. A key combination is basically some key represented by it's virtual key code stored in int _keyand the state of modifier keys - shift, control, alt and windows keys. In case that key combination is used for typing, the key also stores the character that it should produce in _c.
class Key
{
private:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
int _key;
char _c;
public:
constexpr Key()
:
_shift(),
_ctrl(),
_alt(),
_win(),
_key(),
_c()
{}
constexpr Key(const Key& key)
:
_shift(key._shift),
_ctrl(key._ctrl),
_alt(key._alt),
_win(key._win),
_key(key._key),
_c(key._c)
{}
constexpr Key(bool shift, bool ctrl, bool alt, bool win, int key, char c)
:
_shift(shift),
_ctrl(ctrl),
_alt(alt),
_win(win),
_key(key),
_c(c)
{}
Key& operator= (Key& key)
{
_shift = key._shift;
_ctrl = key._ctrl;
_alt = key._alt;
_win = key._win;
_key = key._key;
_c = key._c;
}
bool operator== (const Key& key) const
{
return (_shift == key._shift && _ctrl == key._ctrl && _alt == key._alt && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
}
bool operator!= (const Key& key) const
{
return !(*this == key);
}
};
Are there any design flaws or some obvious things that I'm missing?
c++
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
For a little game of mine I have created a Key.h file that should allow representation of a key press combination. A key combination is basically some key represented by it's virtual key code stored in int _keyand the state of modifier keys - shift, control, alt and windows keys. In case that key combination is used for typing, the key also stores the character that it should produce in _c.
class Key
{
private:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
int _key;
char _c;
public:
constexpr Key()
:
_shift(),
_ctrl(),
_alt(),
_win(),
_key(),
_c()
{}
constexpr Key(const Key& key)
:
_shift(key._shift),
_ctrl(key._ctrl),
_alt(key._alt),
_win(key._win),
_key(key._key),
_c(key._c)
{}
constexpr Key(bool shift, bool ctrl, bool alt, bool win, int key, char c)
:
_shift(shift),
_ctrl(ctrl),
_alt(alt),
_win(win),
_key(key),
_c(c)
{}
Key& operator= (Key& key)
{
_shift = key._shift;
_ctrl = key._ctrl;
_alt = key._alt;
_win = key._win;
_key = key._key;
_c = key._c;
}
bool operator== (const Key& key) const
{
return (_shift == key._shift && _ctrl == key._ctrl && _alt == key._alt && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
}
bool operator!= (const Key& key) const
{
return !(*this == key);
}
};
Are there any design flaws or some obvious things that I'm missing?
c++
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
For a little game of mine I have created a Key.h file that should allow representation of a key press combination. A key combination is basically some key represented by it's virtual key code stored in int _keyand the state of modifier keys - shift, control, alt and windows keys. In case that key combination is used for typing, the key also stores the character that it should produce in _c.
class Key
{
private:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
int _key;
char _c;
public:
constexpr Key()
:
_shift(),
_ctrl(),
_alt(),
_win(),
_key(),
_c()
{}
constexpr Key(const Key& key)
:
_shift(key._shift),
_ctrl(key._ctrl),
_alt(key._alt),
_win(key._win),
_key(key._key),
_c(key._c)
{}
constexpr Key(bool shift, bool ctrl, bool alt, bool win, int key, char c)
:
_shift(shift),
_ctrl(ctrl),
_alt(alt),
_win(win),
_key(key),
_c(c)
{}
Key& operator= (Key& key)
{
_shift = key._shift;
_ctrl = key._ctrl;
_alt = key._alt;
_win = key._win;
_key = key._key;
_c = key._c;
}
bool operator== (const Key& key) const
{
return (_shift == key._shift && _ctrl == key._ctrl && _alt == key._alt && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
}
bool operator!= (const Key& key) const
{
return !(*this == key);
}
};
Are there any design flaws or some obvious things that I'm missing?
c++
c++
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
asked 44 mins ago
Mantas KandrataviciusMantas Kandratavicius
11
11
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
I would start by fixing the warnings, one of which is an actual bug:
[1]
Operator = not returning a value
main.cpp: In member function 'Key& Key::operator=(Key&)':
main.cpp:50:5: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Wreturn-type]
}
^
main.cpp: In member function 'bool Key::operator==(const Key&) const':
Also: your operator= gets Key& key instead of const Key& key
Wait! don't rush to fix it. You can just eliminate it altogether and rely on the default assignment operator that does the same job ("rule of zero").
[2] using comma in the long list of equality check -- an actual bug
main.cpp:54:100: warning: left operand of comma operator has no effect [-Wunused-value]
return ( ... && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wait! don't rush to fix it. We will use std::bitset so the entire operator== would become simpler.
[3] Use std::bitset for the bool flags
Instead of:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
Use:
enum class SpecialKeys {SHIFT, CTRL, ALT, WIN, _SIZE_};
std::bitset<SpecialKeys::_SIZE_> specialKeys;
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
Ah, very constructive. Since you mentioned the rule of zero, should I just completely remove the copy constructor or request it from compiler with= default?
– Mantas Kandratavicius
2 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "196"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211446%2fa-class-that-represents-a-key-combination%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
I would start by fixing the warnings, one of which is an actual bug:
[1]
Operator = not returning a value
main.cpp: In member function 'Key& Key::operator=(Key&)':
main.cpp:50:5: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Wreturn-type]
}
^
main.cpp: In member function 'bool Key::operator==(const Key&) const':
Also: your operator= gets Key& key instead of const Key& key
Wait! don't rush to fix it. You can just eliminate it altogether and rely on the default assignment operator that does the same job ("rule of zero").
[2] using comma in the long list of equality check -- an actual bug
main.cpp:54:100: warning: left operand of comma operator has no effect [-Wunused-value]
return ( ... && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wait! don't rush to fix it. We will use std::bitset so the entire operator== would become simpler.
[3] Use std::bitset for the bool flags
Instead of:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
Use:
enum class SpecialKeys {SHIFT, CTRL, ALT, WIN, _SIZE_};
std::bitset<SpecialKeys::_SIZE_> specialKeys;
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
Ah, very constructive. Since you mentioned the rule of zero, should I just completely remove the copy constructor or request it from compiler with= default?
– Mantas Kandratavicius
2 mins ago
add a comment |
I would start by fixing the warnings, one of which is an actual bug:
[1]
Operator = not returning a value
main.cpp: In member function 'Key& Key::operator=(Key&)':
main.cpp:50:5: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Wreturn-type]
}
^
main.cpp: In member function 'bool Key::operator==(const Key&) const':
Also: your operator= gets Key& key instead of const Key& key
Wait! don't rush to fix it. You can just eliminate it altogether and rely on the default assignment operator that does the same job ("rule of zero").
[2] using comma in the long list of equality check -- an actual bug
main.cpp:54:100: warning: left operand of comma operator has no effect [-Wunused-value]
return ( ... && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wait! don't rush to fix it. We will use std::bitset so the entire operator== would become simpler.
[3] Use std::bitset for the bool flags
Instead of:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
Use:
enum class SpecialKeys {SHIFT, CTRL, ALT, WIN, _SIZE_};
std::bitset<SpecialKeys::_SIZE_> specialKeys;
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
Ah, very constructive. Since you mentioned the rule of zero, should I just completely remove the copy constructor or request it from compiler with= default?
– Mantas Kandratavicius
2 mins ago
add a comment |
I would start by fixing the warnings, one of which is an actual bug:
[1]
Operator = not returning a value
main.cpp: In member function 'Key& Key::operator=(Key&)':
main.cpp:50:5: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Wreturn-type]
}
^
main.cpp: In member function 'bool Key::operator==(const Key&) const':
Also: your operator= gets Key& key instead of const Key& key
Wait! don't rush to fix it. You can just eliminate it altogether and rely on the default assignment operator that does the same job ("rule of zero").
[2] using comma in the long list of equality check -- an actual bug
main.cpp:54:100: warning: left operand of comma operator has no effect [-Wunused-value]
return ( ... && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wait! don't rush to fix it. We will use std::bitset so the entire operator== would become simpler.
[3] Use std::bitset for the bool flags
Instead of:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
Use:
enum class SpecialKeys {SHIFT, CTRL, ALT, WIN, _SIZE_};
std::bitset<SpecialKeys::_SIZE_> specialKeys;
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
I would start by fixing the warnings, one of which is an actual bug:
[1]
Operator = not returning a value
main.cpp: In member function 'Key& Key::operator=(Key&)':
main.cpp:50:5: warning: no return statement in function returning non-void [-Wreturn-type]
}
^
main.cpp: In member function 'bool Key::operator==(const Key&) const':
Also: your operator= gets Key& key instead of const Key& key
Wait! don't rush to fix it. You can just eliminate it altogether and rely on the default assignment operator that does the same job ("rule of zero").
[2] using comma in the long list of equality check -- an actual bug
main.cpp:54:100: warning: left operand of comma operator has no effect [-Wunused-value]
return ( ... && _win == key._win && _key == key._key, _c == key._c);
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wait! don't rush to fix it. We will use std::bitset so the entire operator== would become simpler.
[3] Use std::bitset for the bool flags
Instead of:
bool _shift;
bool _ctrl;
bool _alt;
bool _win;
Use:
enum class SpecialKeys {SHIFT, CTRL, ALT, WIN, _SIZE_};
std::bitset<SpecialKeys::_SIZE_> specialKeys;
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
answered 12 mins ago
Amir KirshAmir Kirsh
1213
1213
Ah, very constructive. Since you mentioned the rule of zero, should I just completely remove the copy constructor or request it from compiler with= default?
– Mantas Kandratavicius
2 mins ago
add a comment |
Ah, very constructive. Since you mentioned the rule of zero, should I just completely remove the copy constructor or request it from compiler with= default?
– Mantas Kandratavicius
2 mins ago
Ah, very constructive. Since you mentioned the rule of zero, should I just completely remove the copy constructor or request it from compiler with
= default ?– Mantas Kandratavicius
2 mins ago
Ah, very constructive. Since you mentioned the rule of zero, should I just completely remove the copy constructor or request it from compiler with
= default ?– Mantas Kandratavicius
2 mins ago
add a comment |
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Mantas Kandratavicius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Code Review Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcodereview.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f211446%2fa-class-that-represents-a-key-combination%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
