• 0

C++ (STL): remove specific object from list


Question

Hello,

I have learned that I can create a linked list of objects, like this:

list< MyClass* > = myList;

I also know that if it were a list of primitive types, such as a list<int>, I could remove a specific element by calling

remove(myList.begin(), myList.end(), 8);

which for instance would remove any element that is 8.

However let's say MyClass has an attribute name_. I have a list of objects of type MyClass, and I'd like to create a function that finds and removes the object that has that name.

Stub:

void remove(string &name) const

{

remove(myList.begin(), myList.end(), ???);

}

The thing is, if I supply the string &name as an argument to the remove algorithm, it will attempt to compare MyClass objects with strings, which doesn't make sense. What I'd like it to do is compare the name_ attribute of its MyClass objects with the string &name.

I thought of supplying a boolean function that would return element->name_ == name, but the function would need two arguments (list<MyClass*> element, string &name) and I don't think that would work.

As you see I'm stuck.

10 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

The way I have done this (which is probably wrong as I taught it to myself) is to use a std::map.

This way you would do something like:

 std::map&lt; std::string name, MyClass* &gt; MyList;
MyList["ClassName"] = PtrToClass;
MyList.erase( the name of the class (the std::name), in this case "ClassName" );

Even if this is wrong hopefully someone can show me how to do it right.

  • 0

for a list:

std::list&lt;MyClass*&gt; MyList

a remove function could be like:

void remove(string &amp;name) const
{
  std::list&lt;MyClass*&gt;::iterator iter;
  for (iter = MyList.begin(); iter != MyList.end(); iter++)
  {
	if ((*iter)-&gt;name_.equalis(name))
	{
	  MyList.erase(iter);
	  break;
	}
  }
}

  • 0

Lant's suggestion is probably the correct one if changing the container is practical which would depend on the particular circumstances.

dev's suggestion is probably the easier (and by no means wrong) if you have to stick with list<>.

The more STL solution would be to use one of the supplied algorithms, in this case remove_if would seem appropriate. The link shows some sample code which uses 'compose1' and 'bind2nd' to construct the 'predicate' function. This is also the STL way of doing things, i.e. you are reusing generic components instead of writing lots of special case code.

If all this 'predicate' stuff is a bit confusing try a different approach. Give your class an overloaded equality operator with another class of the same type which only compares their name_ attribute. Then pass a dummy instance of such a class to remove with the name_ attribute set to the desired value to remove.

As you can gather there are really a load of approaches and this can make C++ seem overwhelming at first. Just remember no one way is necessarily the best. But usually the professionals prefer the solution which reuses existing generic code rather than the individual approach.

  • 0

Ok I'm starting to make some sense of out bind2nd and compose1. Really cool stuff.

Another important question I have about the STL: let's say I have a vector of pointers to dynamic objects, for example:

std::vector< MyClass* > myVector;

MyClass * object1 = new MyClass();

MyClass * object2 = new MyClass();

myVector.push_back(object1);

myVector.push_back(object2);

When I call myVector.clear(), the cplusplus reference says that it will call the destructors for each of the elements. The thing is, I'm not sure if I need to call delete for each of these pointers or not.

  • 0
  Eoin said:
dev's suggestion is probably the easier (and by no means wrong) if you have to stick with list<>.

i tend to go for more verbose code due to me favouring the C way of doing things over C++. Only times i use C++ parts is when i want a list of things and don't want to make my own linked list, or i need classes with subclasses. Most of the time i avoid the STL due it not liking threading very well (in my experience anyway)

  Dr_Asik said:
Ok I'm starting to make some sense of out bind2nd and compose1. Really cool stuff.

Another important question I have about the STL: let's say I have a vector of pointers to dynamic objects, for example:

std::vector< MyClass* > myVector;

MyClass * object1 = new MyClass();

MyClass * object2 = new MyClass();

myVector.push_back(object1);

myVector.push_back(object2);

When I call myVector.clear(), the cplusplus reference says that it will call the destructors for each of the elements. The thing is, I'm not sure if I need to call delete for each of these pointers or not.

afaik you will need to delete the objects, i wasn't aware that calling clear() would call the destructors of the objects but apparently it does (Y)

  • 0
  Dr_Asik said:
When I call myVector.clear(), the cplusplus reference says that it will call the destructors for each of the elements. The thing is, I'm not sure if I need to call delete for each of these pointers or not.

Yeah I think you still need to call delete. I'm pretty sure the destructors only get called for objects stored by value

std::vector< MyClass > myVector;

MyClass object1;

myVector.push_back(object1);

If you need to store them as pointers consider using a smart point like boost::shared_ptr<>.

  • 0

Hm I'm really puzzled at how I am supposed to deallocate memory when erasing specific elements from a list. I thought about using auto_ptr (I can't use boost now), but the cplusplus reference advises against this:

Warning: It is generally a bad idea to put auto_ptr objects inside C++ STL containers. C++ containers can do funny things with the data inside them, including frequent reallocation (when being copied, for instance). Since calling the destructor of an auto_ptr object will free up the memory associated with that object, any C++ container reallocation will cause any auto_ptr objects to become invalid.

http://www.cppreference.com/cppmisc/auto_ptr.html

So what should I do?

  • 0

Well you can still manually call delete whenever you remove a element from a container, but ideally you do want a smart pointer to do this automatically.

If Boost IS an option then use shared_ptr as I suggested or the pointer containers. Or if you have access to tr1 the tr1::shared_ptr is the boost::shared_ptr basicially.

Otherwise you could try finding another reference counted smart pointer. The problem is inside STL containers objects can get copied as the container grows so if you used auto_ptr then at times there could exist two auto_ptr's to the same object. You need to use a reference counted smart pointer in this case as it ensures the object is deleted only when there are no smart pointers left pointing to it.

I know Scott Meyers published a reference counted smart pointer. Haven't used it myself but I imagine it should work fine. Of course it's published in one of his books but maybe you can find a listing of the code if you look around his online articles. His site maintains a list.

Others surely exist out there too but ideally you should use the boost or tr1 shared_ptr if you can.

  • 0

Well, as I really have to stick to absolute basic stuff, the STL, and not use any sort of loops, I have developped a very heavy and unelegant solution. Basically I selectively copy the elements that must not be removed into a new container. But as the containers contain pointers to these elements, I have to really copy objects, a costly process. Then I call delete on every pointer of the old container, erase the container, and assign the new container to the old container. Then the new container is discarded.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I absolutely hate how they are using intentionally misleading wording to scare people into "upgrading" their operating system. They could use the money they are spending on marketing to keep Windows 10 running for, like, 10 more years.
    • Poorly or not, you're confronted to a decision when you visit this kind of website.
    • This tool is for ripping CDs not burning them. So it's to save cd audio tracks as files. Simple old tool to do it. For burning I used to use Nero Burning Tools back in the day rather than the ones you listed.
    • "The company has recently announced the forming of a new agentic AI team to develop an agentic AI framework for use in robotics." I wonder if any of their executives attented, "Microsoft Build 2025" last month?
    • Microsoft Build conference to leave Seattle after years in the city by Pradeep Viswanathan Microsoft Build is a flagship annual developer conference held by Microsoft since 2011. In 2017, Microsoft relocated Build from San Francisco to its home turf in Seattle. The proximity to its main campus allowed greater participation from its own engineers and executives, offering attendees a more integrated experience. Today, Jonathan Choe revealed on X that Microsoft has decided to move its Build developer conference out of Seattle. He discovered this information via an email sent by Visit Seattle to its members. Visit Seattle is a private, non-profit destination marketing organization that promotes travel to Seattle and King County. As a result of the move, Seattle-based hotels could lose approximately 9,314 room nights annually. Surprisingly, Visit Seattle’s message included several details about Microsoft’s reasons for the change. The primary reason appears to have come from within Microsoft itself. The company feels that Build lost momentum post-COVID, and the scheduling conflict with Google I/O, a competing event, has made it harder to attract the intended audience. Microsoft’s leadership believes they can better re-energize the program and boost attendance by moving it out of Seattle. The note even suggests that Build will likely be relocated to San Francisco or Las Vegas in 2026. Another factor contributing to the decision is the condition of the city. Last month, during the conference, Microsoft leadership and attendees walked between the Hyatt Regency and the Arch building on 8th Street. Reportedly, there were complaints about the general uncleanliness of the area, the visible presence of individuals using drugs, and unhoused individuals in a recurring tent in the Arch Tunnel. Visit Seattle believes these concerns also played a role in Microsoft’s final decision to relocate Build. Given Microsoft's high-profile presence and the economic impact of the event, this relocation may spark a political storm within the Seattle mayor’s office, drawing criticism over the city’s handling of downtown conditions.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      Vladimir Migunov earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      daelos earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      daelos earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Mentor
      Karlston went up a rank
      Mentor
    • One Month Later
      EdwardFranciscoVilla earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      493
    2. 2
      snowy owl
      252
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      250
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      220
    5. 5
      +Edouard
      169
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!