I am trying to implement the observer pattern with the catch that I need to add new functionality into each observer later on in the project.
class Obsevers {
public:
virtual ~Obsevers() {}
};
class TestObserver : public Obsevers {
public:
void print1(int i) {
std::cout << i << std::endl;
}
};
class TestObserver2 : public Obsevers {
public:
void print2(int i, char c) {
std::cout << i << " , " << c << std::endl;
}
//possible new functions here later
};
My notify method is as follows:
template<typename Type, typename Notify>
void NotifyObserver(Notify notify) {
typedef std::list<Obsevers*>::iterator iter;
iter it = m_observers.begin();
iter end = m_observers.end();
for(; it != end; ++it) {
Type * o = dynamic_cast<Type*>(*it);
if(o == NULL) continue;
notify(o);
}
}
To make a call to notify the code is as follows.
NotifyObserver<TestObserver2>(boost::bind(&TestObserver2::print2, _1, 32, 'b'));
Now given the context with the above blocks of code my question is using a placeholder(_1) for the object parameter in bind correct or is this undefined behavior?
The boost documentation on bind did no specify using a placeholder for objects only for function parameters.
Your code is correct.
The Boost.Bind documentation indicates that your code
boost::bind(&TestObserver2::print2, _1, 32, 'b')
is the same as
boost::bind<void>(boost::mem_fn(&TestObserver2::print2), _1, 32, 'b')
where boost::mem_fn
is responsible for invoking the pointer-to-member-function. As long as the bound object is evaulated with something that boost::mem_fn
can use, such as a pointer or reference, it will properly invoke the function.