How do I make a variable always equal to the result of some calculations? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowLazy evaluation in C++Convention for leaving body of an if/else blankHow do you clear a stringstream variable?What's the best way to do fixed-point math?Is the sizeof(some pointer) always equal to four?How to make a SIMPLE C++ Makefile?Is there some ninja trick to make a variable constant after its declaration?How to make my custom type to work with “range-based for loops”?Does static constexpr variable make sense?How to make a conditional typedef in C++QTableView slow scrolling when many cells are visible at onceC++11 Print run-time variable name equal to some constexpr variable

"misplaced omit" error when >centering columns

Where does this common spurious transmission come from? Is there a quality difference?

Can MTA send mail via a relay without being told so?

Calculator final project in Python

Is it ever safe to open a suspicious HTML file (e.g. email attachment)?

What was the first Unix version to run on a microcomputer?

Method for adding error messages to a dictionary given a key

Would this house-rule that treats advantage as a +1 to the roll instead (and disadvantage as -1) and allows them to stack be balanced?

Are police here, aren't itthey?

How to check if all elements of 1 list are in the *same quantity* and in any order, in the list2?

Won the lottery - how do I keep the money?

The past simple of "gaslight" – "gaslighted" or "gaslit"?

Domestic-to-international connection at Orlando (MCO)

Is it okay to majorly distort historical facts while writing a fiction story?

Which one is the true statement?

Does Germany produce more waste than the US?

Why don't programming languages automatically manage the synchronous/asynchronous problem?

What flight has the highest ratio of time difference to flight time?

Should I tutor a student who I know has cheated on their homework?

Why the difference in type-inference over the as-pattern in two similar function definitions?

Bartok - Syncopation (1): Meaning of notes in between Grand Staff

Legal workarounds for testamentary trust perceived as unfair

Grabbing quick drinks

Where do students learn to solve polynomial equations these days?



How do I make a variable always equal to the result of some calculations?



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowLazy evaluation in C++Convention for leaving body of an if/else blankHow do you clear a stringstream variable?What's the best way to do fixed-point math?Is the sizeof(some pointer) always equal to four?How to make a SIMPLE C++ Makefile?Is there some ninja trick to make a variable constant after its declaration?How to make my custom type to work with “range-based for loops”?Does static constexpr variable make sense?How to make a conditional typedef in C++QTableView slow scrolling when many cells are visible at onceC++11 Print run-time variable name equal to some constexpr variable










25















In math, if z = x+y/2, then z will always change whenever we replace the value of x and y. Can we do that in programming without having to specifically updating z whenever we change the value of x and y?



I mean something like that won't work, right?



int x;
int y;
int zx + y;
cin >> x;
cin >> y;
cout << z;


If you're confused why I would need that, I want the variable shown live, and get it updated automatically when a rhs-variable make changes.



Like when killing a creep and get gold, then the net-worth (cash+worth of own items) shown changes. Or the speed meter of a car changing depending on how slow or fast you're driving.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 3





    Right, that won't work. That's a spreadsheet thing.

    – Pete Becker
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @RobertAndrzejuk Because it'd be very useful. For example, if you write a game and have something like networth(cash+the worth of all you own). You will have to call the function of networth everytime one of those update. That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    2 days ago






  • 19





    @NayWunnaZaw In my experience this is why getters and setters are encouraged over direct variable access. If you always wanted networth to be updated, you could retrieve the value using getNetWorth() which would itself call updateNetWorth() before returning the value... or just calculate it before returning it.

    – Onyz
    2 days ago






  • 39





    That's called a "function."

    – ApproachingDarknessFish
    2 days ago






  • 3





    Surely this is a bit of an XY-problem?

    – Carmeister
    yesterday















25















In math, if z = x+y/2, then z will always change whenever we replace the value of x and y. Can we do that in programming without having to specifically updating z whenever we change the value of x and y?



I mean something like that won't work, right?



int x;
int y;
int zx + y;
cin >> x;
cin >> y;
cout << z;


If you're confused why I would need that, I want the variable shown live, and get it updated automatically when a rhs-variable make changes.



Like when killing a creep and get gold, then the net-worth (cash+worth of own items) shown changes. Or the speed meter of a car changing depending on how slow or fast you're driving.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 3





    Right, that won't work. That's a spreadsheet thing.

    – Pete Becker
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @RobertAndrzejuk Because it'd be very useful. For example, if you write a game and have something like networth(cash+the worth of all you own). You will have to call the function of networth everytime one of those update. That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    2 days ago






  • 19





    @NayWunnaZaw In my experience this is why getters and setters are encouraged over direct variable access. If you always wanted networth to be updated, you could retrieve the value using getNetWorth() which would itself call updateNetWorth() before returning the value... or just calculate it before returning it.

    – Onyz
    2 days ago






  • 39





    That's called a "function."

    – ApproachingDarknessFish
    2 days ago






  • 3





    Surely this is a bit of an XY-problem?

    – Carmeister
    yesterday













25












25








25


6






In math, if z = x+y/2, then z will always change whenever we replace the value of x and y. Can we do that in programming without having to specifically updating z whenever we change the value of x and y?



I mean something like that won't work, right?



int x;
int y;
int zx + y;
cin >> x;
cin >> y;
cout << z;


If you're confused why I would need that, I want the variable shown live, and get it updated automatically when a rhs-variable make changes.



Like when killing a creep and get gold, then the net-worth (cash+worth of own items) shown changes. Or the speed meter of a car changing depending on how slow or fast you're driving.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












In math, if z = x+y/2, then z will always change whenever we replace the value of x and y. Can we do that in programming without having to specifically updating z whenever we change the value of x and y?



I mean something like that won't work, right?



int x;
int y;
int zx + y;
cin >> x;
cin >> y;
cout << z;


If you're confused why I would need that, I want the variable shown live, and get it updated automatically when a rhs-variable make changes.



Like when killing a creep and get gold, then the net-worth (cash+worth of own items) shown changes. Or the speed meter of a car changing depending on how slow or fast you're driving.







c++ c++11






share|improve this question









New contributor




Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited yesterday









Peter Mortensen

13.8k1987113




13.8k1987113






New contributor




Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









Nay Wunna ZawNay Wunna Zaw

136211




136211




New contributor




Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 3





    Right, that won't work. That's a spreadsheet thing.

    – Pete Becker
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @RobertAndrzejuk Because it'd be very useful. For example, if you write a game and have something like networth(cash+the worth of all you own). You will have to call the function of networth everytime one of those update. That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    2 days ago






  • 19





    @NayWunnaZaw In my experience this is why getters and setters are encouraged over direct variable access. If you always wanted networth to be updated, you could retrieve the value using getNetWorth() which would itself call updateNetWorth() before returning the value... or just calculate it before returning it.

    – Onyz
    2 days ago






  • 39





    That's called a "function."

    – ApproachingDarknessFish
    2 days ago






  • 3





    Surely this is a bit of an XY-problem?

    – Carmeister
    yesterday












  • 3





    Right, that won't work. That's a spreadsheet thing.

    – Pete Becker
    2 days ago






  • 2





    @RobertAndrzejuk Because it'd be very useful. For example, if you write a game and have something like networth(cash+the worth of all you own). You will have to call the function of networth everytime one of those update. That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    2 days ago






  • 19





    @NayWunnaZaw In my experience this is why getters and setters are encouraged over direct variable access. If you always wanted networth to be updated, you could retrieve the value using getNetWorth() which would itself call updateNetWorth() before returning the value... or just calculate it before returning it.

    – Onyz
    2 days ago






  • 39





    That's called a "function."

    – ApproachingDarknessFish
    2 days ago






  • 3





    Surely this is a bit of an XY-problem?

    – Carmeister
    yesterday







3




3





Right, that won't work. That's a spreadsheet thing.

– Pete Becker
2 days ago





Right, that won't work. That's a spreadsheet thing.

– Pete Becker
2 days ago




2




2





@RobertAndrzejuk Because it'd be very useful. For example, if you write a game and have something like networth(cash+the worth of all you own). You will have to call the function of networth everytime one of those update. That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.

– Nay Wunna Zaw
2 days ago





@RobertAndrzejuk Because it'd be very useful. For example, if you write a game and have something like networth(cash+the worth of all you own). You will have to call the function of networth everytime one of those update. That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.

– Nay Wunna Zaw
2 days ago




19




19





@NayWunnaZaw In my experience this is why getters and setters are encouraged over direct variable access. If you always wanted networth to be updated, you could retrieve the value using getNetWorth() which would itself call updateNetWorth() before returning the value... or just calculate it before returning it.

– Onyz
2 days ago





@NayWunnaZaw In my experience this is why getters and setters are encouraged over direct variable access. If you always wanted networth to be updated, you could retrieve the value using getNetWorth() which would itself call updateNetWorth() before returning the value... or just calculate it before returning it.

– Onyz
2 days ago




39




39





That's called a "function."

– ApproachingDarknessFish
2 days ago





That's called a "function."

– ApproachingDarknessFish
2 days ago




3




3





Surely this is a bit of an XY-problem?

– Carmeister
yesterday





Surely this is a bit of an XY-problem?

– Carmeister
yesterday












9 Answers
9






active

oldest

votes


















31














You can get close to this with by using a lambda in C++. Generally, when you set a variable like



int x;
int y;
int zx + y;


z will only be the result of x + y at that time. You'd have to do z = x + y; every time you change x or y to keep it update.



If you use a lambda though, you can have it capture what objects it should refer to, and what calculation should be done, and then every time you access the lambda it will give you the result at that point in time. That looks like



int x;
int y;
auto z = [&]() return x + y; ;
cin >> x;
cin >> y;
cout << z();


and now z() will have the correct value instead of the uninitialized garbage that the original code had.



If the computation is very expensive you can even add some caching to the lambda to make sure you aren't running the computation when you don't need to. That would look like



auto z = [&]() y != cache_y)

cache_x = x;
cache_y = y;
cache_result = x + y;

return cache_result;
;





share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    Also, at that point you should not repeat the cache code for each kind of lambda. A class encapsulation is pretty much required there.

    – Max Langhof
    2 days ago






  • 6





    And a class can be used to avoid the z() syntax as well: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3c3dafe9856c28b8

    – Mooing Duck
    2 days ago











  • @MooingDuck That's awesome! I didn't think it was possible. It deserves to be an answer on its own!

    – Fabio Turati
    2 days ago











  • @FabioTurati See Aconcagua's answer

    – NathanOliver
    2 days ago






  • 6





    Erm you probably don't want static for caching... lambdas can be stateful for a reason.

    – Mehrdad
    yesterday



















27














You mean something like this:



class Z

int& x;
int& y;
public:
Z(int& x, int& y) : x(x), y(y)
operator int() return x + y;
;


The class delays calculation of the result until casted as int. As cast operator is not explicit, Z can be used whenever an int is required. As there's an overload of operator<< for int, you can use it with e. g. std::cout directly:



int x, y;
Z z(x, y);
std::cin >> x >> y;
if(std::cin) // otherwise, IO error! (e. g. bad user input)
std::cout << z << std::endl;





share|improve this answer























  • while this could work whenever we need z, this requires a whole class to be created only for one variable. so i'm preferring the lambda method to be chosen as answer.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    yesterday






  • 2





    @NayWunnaZaw: If it's a one-off usage, sure, use the lambda. But if your code has multiple places where dynamic types like this are needed, a slightly more complex class (templated, receiving a function, e.g. one of the operator wrappers like std::plus) would be only a little longer at time of definition, while supporting reuse without redefining a fairly subtle thing at each point of use. I think this is the better answer for when this is a pattern, not merely a one-off trick.

    – ShadowRanger
    yesterday











  • @ShadowRanger Yes, I understand that. But it'd be off topic if I accept the class type answer. What I asked is a variable which will get updated whenever x and y are changed. So I think lambda is an appropriate answer for my question.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    yesterday






  • 3





    @NayWunnaZaw: BTW, just to be clear: You realize lambdas are (unnamed) classes, right? They're syntactic sugar around functors (the captures are instance attributes, and the arguments are arguments to operator()) so in both cases a class exists (or doesn't exist due to inlining). This explicitly overrides operator int (so implicit conversion does the trick), where lambdas implicitly override operator() (so explicit call parens are needed), otherwise they're the same. It's fine if you prefer the lambda for code brevity, but in terms of what actually runs, both of them involve classes.

    – ShadowRanger
    yesterday












  • This is my personal favourite kind of answer!

    – Ted Lyngmo
    20 hours ago


















18














The closest you probably can get is to create a functor:



#include <iostream>

int main()
int x;
int y;

auto z = [&x, &y] return x + y; ; // a lambda capturing x and y

while(true)
std::cin >> x;
std::cin >> y;
std::cout << z() << "n";







share|improve this answer






























    10














    There are two chief techniques:



    1. Deferred calculation - instead of z being a simple variable, make it a function which calculates the value on demand (see other answers for examples). This can be source-code transparent if z is some proxy object with implicit conversion to the required type (as in Aconcagua's answer).


    2. Explicit notification of changes. This requires x and y to be observable types; when either changes value, then z updates itself (and notifies its observers if applicable).


    The first version is usually preferred, but the second may be more appropriate if you need z to be an observable type.






    share|improve this answer

























    • The observation approach is interesting, too, if calculations to be done are expensive. Appropriately implemented, I consider it more elegant than the caching proposed by NathanOliver...

      – Aconcagua
      yesterday






    • 2





      @Aconcagua, amend that to: if calculations to be done are expensive and reads are more frequent than updates. Otherwise, we need to add a way to avoid computing values that don't get used.

      – Toby Speight
      yesterday


















    5














    This sounds like the XY problem (pun intended).



    From the sound of it, you are not really writing code according to good object oriented practices. I would advise you not to use the "tricks" other people have suggested, but to actually learn how to make better use of OO structure.



    Before I go into that, note that assignment is distinct from an equality relation. The = in C++ is assignment, which is not the same as the = in maths. There are some (but not many) programming languages that do support equality relations, but C++ is not one of them. The thing is, adding support for equality relations introduces a heap of new challenges, so it's not as simple as "why isn't it in C++ yet".



    Anyway, in this case, you should probably be encapsulating your related variables in a class. Then you can use methods to obtain the "up-to-date" information. For example:



    class Player 
    std::vector<int> inventory;
    int cash;
    public:
    int inventory_total();
    int net_worth();


    //adds up total value of inventory
    int Player::inventory_total()
    int total = 0;
    for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = inventory.begin(); it != inventory.end(); ++it)
    total += *it;

    return total;


    //calculates net worth
    int Player::net_worth()
    //we are using inventory_total() as if it were a variable that automatically
    //holds the sum of the inventory values
    return inventory_total() + cash;



    ...


    //we are using net_worth() as if it were a variable that automatically
    //holds the sum of the cash and total holdings
    std::cout << player1.net_worth();


    I admit that adding this behaviour to a class is quite a bit more complicated than saying z = x + y, but it really is only a few extra lines of code.




    That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.




    In this case the object doesn't have a net_worth member variable, so you can't accidentally use it instead of calling the function.






    share|improve this answer

























    • can you give me the pros and cons of using lambdas vs this? which would be better practice?

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 1





      Yes, this is the (real) answer I would expect. Unfortunately, there is FGITW (I think it is a real problem).

      – Peter Mortensen
      yesterday


















    3














    1. You create a function for that.

    2. You call the function with the appropriate arguments when you need the value.



    int z(int x, int y)

    return (x + y);



    int x;
    int y;

    // This does ot work
    // int zx + y;

    cin >> x;
    cin >> y;
    cout << z(x, y);





    share|improve this answer


















    • 1





      yes, i mean the only way to get z updated is to call that function everytime we change x and y values?

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      2 days ago











    • @NayWunnaZaw, yes, that is correct.

      – R Sahu
      2 days ago






    • 1





      @NayWunnaZaw, you can avoid the repeated use of x and y by using a lambda function, as shown by Nathan but you still have to make the call.

      – R Sahu
      2 days ago






    • 4





      @NayWunnaZaw To complete the issue: Even with my solution, there is a function call (to the cast operator!), just that it is implicit and not required explicitly...

      – Aconcagua
      2 days ago


















    2














    You can define the following lambda z which always returns the current value of x+y because x and y are captured by reference:



    DEMO



    int main()

    int x;
    int y;

    const auto z = [&x, &y]() return x+y; ;

    std::cin >> x; // 1
    std::cin >> y; // 2
    std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 3

    std::cin >> x; // 3
    std::cin >> y; // 4
    std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 7






    share|improve this answer




















    • 2





      Don't use parentheses around return values – return is not a function, and in worst case, the parentheses can even create a dangling reference (with return type being decltype(auto)).

      – Aconcagua
      2 days ago











    • @Aconcagua thx! you are right. I edited my answer.

      – Hiroki
      2 days ago












    • Why downvoted ? At least I posted my answer faster than Ted with my tested code. Hmm... :)

      – Hiroki
      yesterday







    • 1





      Well, I didn't and wouldn't have considered the parentheses worth doing so either. If they were the reason – well, people tend to never come back to remove a DV even if the answer was fixed, so (I don't think there's a notification for either, so people might just not even recognise...)

      – Aconcagua
      yesterday











    • @Aconcagua thx for your comment. Although I was downvoted after few hours later of my edition, I was relieved to hear your words.

      – Hiroki
      yesterday


















    1














    So a big problem that I see with the lambda solutions provided is that z is calculated each time that it is inspected even if neither x nor y has changed. To get around this you really need to link these variables.
    I would suggest doing that via class:



    class foo 
    int x;
    int y;
    int z;
    void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
    friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
    public:
    void set_x(const int param)
    x = param;
    calculate();

    int get_x() const return x;
    void set_y(const int param)
    y = param;
    calculate();

    int get_y() const return y;
    int get_z() const return z;
    ;

    istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
    lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
    rhs.calculate();
    return lhs;



    This will recalculate z each time x or y is set. This is a good solution if you access z frequently, and x and y are set infrequently. If x and y are set frequently or calculate is expensive you might consider:



    class foo 
    int x;
    int y;
    int z;
    bool dirty;
    void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
    friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
    public:
    void set_x(const int param)
    x = param;
    dirty = true;

    int get_x() const return x;
    void set_y(const int param)
    y = param;
    dirty = true;

    int get_y() const return y;
    int get_z() const
    if(dirty)
    calculate();

    return z;

    ;

    istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
    lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
    rhs.dirty = true;
    return lhs;



    Note that I've included an extraction operator, so whichever you choose your code can turn into something as simple as:



    foo xyz;

    cin >> xyz;
    cout << xyz.get_z();





    share|improve this answer























    • I don't quite understand how lambda work. But if you've played dota you'd know how gold in the game work. The way it is displayed all the time and adding 1 gold every split-second. I'm asking this question with that in mind. How do I implement that in c++?

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 1





      @NayWunnaZaw I mean generally you're going to have a main class which calls the tick function on any class that needs live updating, passing in a time elapsed since last tick parameter. You'd probably have a player class instead of just the simple foo which would do loads of things. Like the player class's tick would need to update the damage of poison effects, calculate cooldown times, and also calculate gold. I recognize this is probably a gross over simplification. But I do think you're going to want to go with a class here.

      – Jonathan Mee
      yesterday











    • thanks for that, but I like lambda answer more for it's simplicity for a variable. and that fits my question. And class type solution should be used instead if we plan on using the equation more than once like shadowranger said up there.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday


















    0














    You can get what you're asking for by using macros:




    int x, y;
    #define z (x + y)
    /* use x, y, z */
    #undef z



    The #undef is for a little sanity. For more sanity, don't use macros at all, and go with one of the other answers, and deal with the extra verbosity.



    Although a class with a custom operator int would work in a lot of cases ... hmm.






    share|improve this answer























    • Although this could use an EXTREME CAUTION warning, I think it is worth mentioning. Sometimes quick'n'dirty is called for. I have used tricks like this to save time in programming competitions, or in mindless repetitive matrix calculations that would be a lot more verbose and/or bug-prone using any other approach.

      – Artelius
      yesterday












    Your Answer






    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: "1"
    ;
    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: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    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
    );



    );






    Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55402807%2fhow-do-i-make-a-variable-always-equal-to-the-result-of-some-calculations%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    9 Answers
    9






    active

    oldest

    votes








    9 Answers
    9






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    31














    You can get close to this with by using a lambda in C++. Generally, when you set a variable like



    int x;
    int y;
    int zx + y;


    z will only be the result of x + y at that time. You'd have to do z = x + y; every time you change x or y to keep it update.



    If you use a lambda though, you can have it capture what objects it should refer to, and what calculation should be done, and then every time you access the lambda it will give you the result at that point in time. That looks like



    int x;
    int y;
    auto z = [&]() return x + y; ;
    cin >> x;
    cin >> y;
    cout << z();


    and now z() will have the correct value instead of the uninitialized garbage that the original code had.



    If the computation is very expensive you can even add some caching to the lambda to make sure you aren't running the computation when you don't need to. That would look like



    auto z = [&]() y != cache_y)

    cache_x = x;
    cache_y = y;
    cache_result = x + y;

    return cache_result;
    ;





    share|improve this answer




















    • 1





      Also, at that point you should not repeat the cache code for each kind of lambda. A class encapsulation is pretty much required there.

      – Max Langhof
      2 days ago






    • 6





      And a class can be used to avoid the z() syntax as well: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3c3dafe9856c28b8

      – Mooing Duck
      2 days ago











    • @MooingDuck That's awesome! I didn't think it was possible. It deserves to be an answer on its own!

      – Fabio Turati
      2 days ago











    • @FabioTurati See Aconcagua's answer

      – NathanOliver
      2 days ago






    • 6





      Erm you probably don't want static for caching... lambdas can be stateful for a reason.

      – Mehrdad
      yesterday
















    31














    You can get close to this with by using a lambda in C++. Generally, when you set a variable like



    int x;
    int y;
    int zx + y;


    z will only be the result of x + y at that time. You'd have to do z = x + y; every time you change x or y to keep it update.



    If you use a lambda though, you can have it capture what objects it should refer to, and what calculation should be done, and then every time you access the lambda it will give you the result at that point in time. That looks like



    int x;
    int y;
    auto z = [&]() return x + y; ;
    cin >> x;
    cin >> y;
    cout << z();


    and now z() will have the correct value instead of the uninitialized garbage that the original code had.



    If the computation is very expensive you can even add some caching to the lambda to make sure you aren't running the computation when you don't need to. That would look like



    auto z = [&]() y != cache_y)

    cache_x = x;
    cache_y = y;
    cache_result = x + y;

    return cache_result;
    ;





    share|improve this answer




















    • 1





      Also, at that point you should not repeat the cache code for each kind of lambda. A class encapsulation is pretty much required there.

      – Max Langhof
      2 days ago






    • 6





      And a class can be used to avoid the z() syntax as well: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3c3dafe9856c28b8

      – Mooing Duck
      2 days ago











    • @MooingDuck That's awesome! I didn't think it was possible. It deserves to be an answer on its own!

      – Fabio Turati
      2 days ago











    • @FabioTurati See Aconcagua's answer

      – NathanOliver
      2 days ago






    • 6





      Erm you probably don't want static for caching... lambdas can be stateful for a reason.

      – Mehrdad
      yesterday














    31












    31








    31







    You can get close to this with by using a lambda in C++. Generally, when you set a variable like



    int x;
    int y;
    int zx + y;


    z will only be the result of x + y at that time. You'd have to do z = x + y; every time you change x or y to keep it update.



    If you use a lambda though, you can have it capture what objects it should refer to, and what calculation should be done, and then every time you access the lambda it will give you the result at that point in time. That looks like



    int x;
    int y;
    auto z = [&]() return x + y; ;
    cin >> x;
    cin >> y;
    cout << z();


    and now z() will have the correct value instead of the uninitialized garbage that the original code had.



    If the computation is very expensive you can even add some caching to the lambda to make sure you aren't running the computation when you don't need to. That would look like



    auto z = [&]() y != cache_y)

    cache_x = x;
    cache_y = y;
    cache_result = x + y;

    return cache_result;
    ;





    share|improve this answer















    You can get close to this with by using a lambda in C++. Generally, when you set a variable like



    int x;
    int y;
    int zx + y;


    z will only be the result of x + y at that time. You'd have to do z = x + y; every time you change x or y to keep it update.



    If you use a lambda though, you can have it capture what objects it should refer to, and what calculation should be done, and then every time you access the lambda it will give you the result at that point in time. That looks like



    int x;
    int y;
    auto z = [&]() return x + y; ;
    cin >> x;
    cin >> y;
    cout << z();


    and now z() will have the correct value instead of the uninitialized garbage that the original code had.



    If the computation is very expensive you can even add some caching to the lambda to make sure you aren't running the computation when you don't need to. That would look like



    auto z = [&]() y != cache_y)

    cache_x = x;
    cache_y = y;
    cache_result = x + y;

    return cache_result;
    ;






    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited yesterday









    J.G.

    1259




    1259










    answered 2 days ago









    NathanOliverNathanOliver

    97.3k16138214




    97.3k16138214







    • 1





      Also, at that point you should not repeat the cache code for each kind of lambda. A class encapsulation is pretty much required there.

      – Max Langhof
      2 days ago






    • 6





      And a class can be used to avoid the z() syntax as well: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3c3dafe9856c28b8

      – Mooing Duck
      2 days ago











    • @MooingDuck That's awesome! I didn't think it was possible. It deserves to be an answer on its own!

      – Fabio Turati
      2 days ago











    • @FabioTurati See Aconcagua's answer

      – NathanOliver
      2 days ago






    • 6





      Erm you probably don't want static for caching... lambdas can be stateful for a reason.

      – Mehrdad
      yesterday













    • 1





      Also, at that point you should not repeat the cache code for each kind of lambda. A class encapsulation is pretty much required there.

      – Max Langhof
      2 days ago






    • 6





      And a class can be used to avoid the z() syntax as well: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3c3dafe9856c28b8

      – Mooing Duck
      2 days ago











    • @MooingDuck That's awesome! I didn't think it was possible. It deserves to be an answer on its own!

      – Fabio Turati
      2 days ago











    • @FabioTurati See Aconcagua's answer

      – NathanOliver
      2 days ago






    • 6





      Erm you probably don't want static for caching... lambdas can be stateful for a reason.

      – Mehrdad
      yesterday








    1




    1





    Also, at that point you should not repeat the cache code for each kind of lambda. A class encapsulation is pretty much required there.

    – Max Langhof
    2 days ago





    Also, at that point you should not repeat the cache code for each kind of lambda. A class encapsulation is pretty much required there.

    – Max Langhof
    2 days ago




    6




    6





    And a class can be used to avoid the z() syntax as well: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3c3dafe9856c28b8

    – Mooing Duck
    2 days ago





    And a class can be used to avoid the z() syntax as well: coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3c3dafe9856c28b8

    – Mooing Duck
    2 days ago













    @MooingDuck That's awesome! I didn't think it was possible. It deserves to be an answer on its own!

    – Fabio Turati
    2 days ago





    @MooingDuck That's awesome! I didn't think it was possible. It deserves to be an answer on its own!

    – Fabio Turati
    2 days ago













    @FabioTurati See Aconcagua's answer

    – NathanOliver
    2 days ago





    @FabioTurati See Aconcagua's answer

    – NathanOliver
    2 days ago




    6




    6





    Erm you probably don't want static for caching... lambdas can be stateful for a reason.

    – Mehrdad
    yesterday






    Erm you probably don't want static for caching... lambdas can be stateful for a reason.

    – Mehrdad
    yesterday














    27














    You mean something like this:



    class Z

    int& x;
    int& y;
    public:
    Z(int& x, int& y) : x(x), y(y)
    operator int() return x + y;
    ;


    The class delays calculation of the result until casted as int. As cast operator is not explicit, Z can be used whenever an int is required. As there's an overload of operator<< for int, you can use it with e. g. std::cout directly:



    int x, y;
    Z z(x, y);
    std::cin >> x >> y;
    if(std::cin) // otherwise, IO error! (e. g. bad user input)
    std::cout << z << std::endl;





    share|improve this answer























    • while this could work whenever we need z, this requires a whole class to be created only for one variable. so i'm preferring the lambda method to be chosen as answer.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 2





      @NayWunnaZaw: If it's a one-off usage, sure, use the lambda. But if your code has multiple places where dynamic types like this are needed, a slightly more complex class (templated, receiving a function, e.g. one of the operator wrappers like std::plus) would be only a little longer at time of definition, while supporting reuse without redefining a fairly subtle thing at each point of use. I think this is the better answer for when this is a pattern, not merely a one-off trick.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday











    • @ShadowRanger Yes, I understand that. But it'd be off topic if I accept the class type answer. What I asked is a variable which will get updated whenever x and y are changed. So I think lambda is an appropriate answer for my question.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 3





      @NayWunnaZaw: BTW, just to be clear: You realize lambdas are (unnamed) classes, right? They're syntactic sugar around functors (the captures are instance attributes, and the arguments are arguments to operator()) so in both cases a class exists (or doesn't exist due to inlining). This explicitly overrides operator int (so implicit conversion does the trick), where lambdas implicitly override operator() (so explicit call parens are needed), otherwise they're the same. It's fine if you prefer the lambda for code brevity, but in terms of what actually runs, both of them involve classes.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday












    • This is my personal favourite kind of answer!

      – Ted Lyngmo
      20 hours ago















    27














    You mean something like this:



    class Z

    int& x;
    int& y;
    public:
    Z(int& x, int& y) : x(x), y(y)
    operator int() return x + y;
    ;


    The class delays calculation of the result until casted as int. As cast operator is not explicit, Z can be used whenever an int is required. As there's an overload of operator<< for int, you can use it with e. g. std::cout directly:



    int x, y;
    Z z(x, y);
    std::cin >> x >> y;
    if(std::cin) // otherwise, IO error! (e. g. bad user input)
    std::cout << z << std::endl;





    share|improve this answer























    • while this could work whenever we need z, this requires a whole class to be created only for one variable. so i'm preferring the lambda method to be chosen as answer.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 2





      @NayWunnaZaw: If it's a one-off usage, sure, use the lambda. But if your code has multiple places where dynamic types like this are needed, a slightly more complex class (templated, receiving a function, e.g. one of the operator wrappers like std::plus) would be only a little longer at time of definition, while supporting reuse without redefining a fairly subtle thing at each point of use. I think this is the better answer for when this is a pattern, not merely a one-off trick.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday











    • @ShadowRanger Yes, I understand that. But it'd be off topic if I accept the class type answer. What I asked is a variable which will get updated whenever x and y are changed. So I think lambda is an appropriate answer for my question.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 3





      @NayWunnaZaw: BTW, just to be clear: You realize lambdas are (unnamed) classes, right? They're syntactic sugar around functors (the captures are instance attributes, and the arguments are arguments to operator()) so in both cases a class exists (or doesn't exist due to inlining). This explicitly overrides operator int (so implicit conversion does the trick), where lambdas implicitly override operator() (so explicit call parens are needed), otherwise they're the same. It's fine if you prefer the lambda for code brevity, but in terms of what actually runs, both of them involve classes.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday












    • This is my personal favourite kind of answer!

      – Ted Lyngmo
      20 hours ago













    27












    27








    27







    You mean something like this:



    class Z

    int& x;
    int& y;
    public:
    Z(int& x, int& y) : x(x), y(y)
    operator int() return x + y;
    ;


    The class delays calculation of the result until casted as int. As cast operator is not explicit, Z can be used whenever an int is required. As there's an overload of operator<< for int, you can use it with e. g. std::cout directly:



    int x, y;
    Z z(x, y);
    std::cin >> x >> y;
    if(std::cin) // otherwise, IO error! (e. g. bad user input)
    std::cout << z << std::endl;





    share|improve this answer













    You mean something like this:



    class Z

    int& x;
    int& y;
    public:
    Z(int& x, int& y) : x(x), y(y)
    operator int() return x + y;
    ;


    The class delays calculation of the result until casted as int. As cast operator is not explicit, Z can be used whenever an int is required. As there's an overload of operator<< for int, you can use it with e. g. std::cout directly:



    int x, y;
    Z z(x, y);
    std::cin >> x >> y;
    if(std::cin) // otherwise, IO error! (e. g. bad user input)
    std::cout << z << std::endl;






    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 2 days ago









    AconcaguaAconcagua

    13.1k32245




    13.1k32245












    • while this could work whenever we need z, this requires a whole class to be created only for one variable. so i'm preferring the lambda method to be chosen as answer.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 2





      @NayWunnaZaw: If it's a one-off usage, sure, use the lambda. But if your code has multiple places where dynamic types like this are needed, a slightly more complex class (templated, receiving a function, e.g. one of the operator wrappers like std::plus) would be only a little longer at time of definition, while supporting reuse without redefining a fairly subtle thing at each point of use. I think this is the better answer for when this is a pattern, not merely a one-off trick.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday











    • @ShadowRanger Yes, I understand that. But it'd be off topic if I accept the class type answer. What I asked is a variable which will get updated whenever x and y are changed. So I think lambda is an appropriate answer for my question.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 3





      @NayWunnaZaw: BTW, just to be clear: You realize lambdas are (unnamed) classes, right? They're syntactic sugar around functors (the captures are instance attributes, and the arguments are arguments to operator()) so in both cases a class exists (or doesn't exist due to inlining). This explicitly overrides operator int (so implicit conversion does the trick), where lambdas implicitly override operator() (so explicit call parens are needed), otherwise they're the same. It's fine if you prefer the lambda for code brevity, but in terms of what actually runs, both of them involve classes.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday












    • This is my personal favourite kind of answer!

      – Ted Lyngmo
      20 hours ago

















    • while this could work whenever we need z, this requires a whole class to be created only for one variable. so i'm preferring the lambda method to be chosen as answer.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 2





      @NayWunnaZaw: If it's a one-off usage, sure, use the lambda. But if your code has multiple places where dynamic types like this are needed, a slightly more complex class (templated, receiving a function, e.g. one of the operator wrappers like std::plus) would be only a little longer at time of definition, while supporting reuse without redefining a fairly subtle thing at each point of use. I think this is the better answer for when this is a pattern, not merely a one-off trick.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday











    • @ShadowRanger Yes, I understand that. But it'd be off topic if I accept the class type answer. What I asked is a variable which will get updated whenever x and y are changed. So I think lambda is an appropriate answer for my question.

      – Nay Wunna Zaw
      yesterday






    • 3





      @NayWunnaZaw: BTW, just to be clear: You realize lambdas are (unnamed) classes, right? They're syntactic sugar around functors (the captures are instance attributes, and the arguments are arguments to operator()) so in both cases a class exists (or doesn't exist due to inlining). This explicitly overrides operator int (so implicit conversion does the trick), where lambdas implicitly override operator() (so explicit call parens are needed), otherwise they're the same. It's fine if you prefer the lambda for code brevity, but in terms of what actually runs, both of them involve classes.

      – ShadowRanger
      yesterday












    • This is my personal favourite kind of answer!

      – Ted Lyngmo
      20 hours ago
















    while this could work whenever we need z, this requires a whole class to be created only for one variable. so i'm preferring the lambda method to be chosen as answer.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    yesterday





    while this could work whenever we need z, this requires a whole class to be created only for one variable. so i'm preferring the lambda method to be chosen as answer.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    yesterday




    2




    2





    @NayWunnaZaw: If it's a one-off usage, sure, use the lambda. But if your code has multiple places where dynamic types like this are needed, a slightly more complex class (templated, receiving a function, e.g. one of the operator wrappers like std::plus) would be only a little longer at time of definition, while supporting reuse without redefining a fairly subtle thing at each point of use. I think this is the better answer for when this is a pattern, not merely a one-off trick.

    – ShadowRanger
    yesterday





    @NayWunnaZaw: If it's a one-off usage, sure, use the lambda. But if your code has multiple places where dynamic types like this are needed, a slightly more complex class (templated, receiving a function, e.g. one of the operator wrappers like std::plus) would be only a little longer at time of definition, while supporting reuse without redefining a fairly subtle thing at each point of use. I think this is the better answer for when this is a pattern, not merely a one-off trick.

    – ShadowRanger
    yesterday













    @ShadowRanger Yes, I understand that. But it'd be off topic if I accept the class type answer. What I asked is a variable which will get updated whenever x and y are changed. So I think lambda is an appropriate answer for my question.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    yesterday





    @ShadowRanger Yes, I understand that. But it'd be off topic if I accept the class type answer. What I asked is a variable which will get updated whenever x and y are changed. So I think lambda is an appropriate answer for my question.

    – Nay Wunna Zaw
    yesterday




    3




    3





    @NayWunnaZaw: BTW, just to be clear: You realize lambdas are (unnamed) classes, right? They're syntactic sugar around functors (the captures are instance attributes, and the arguments are arguments to operator()) so in both cases a class exists (or doesn't exist due to inlining). This explicitly overrides operator int (so implicit conversion does the trick), where lambdas implicitly override operator() (so explicit call parens are needed), otherwise they're the same. It's fine if you prefer the lambda for code brevity, but in terms of what actually runs, both of them involve classes.

    – ShadowRanger
    yesterday






    @NayWunnaZaw: BTW, just to be clear: You realize lambdas are (unnamed) classes, right? They're syntactic sugar around functors (the captures are instance attributes, and the arguments are arguments to operator()) so in both cases a class exists (or doesn't exist due to inlining). This explicitly overrides operator int (so implicit conversion does the trick), where lambdas implicitly override operator() (so explicit call parens are needed), otherwise they're the same. It's fine if you prefer the lambda for code brevity, but in terms of what actually runs, both of them involve classes.

    – ShadowRanger
    yesterday














    This is my personal favourite kind of answer!

    – Ted Lyngmo
    20 hours ago





    This is my personal favourite kind of answer!

    – Ted Lyngmo
    20 hours ago











    18














    The closest you probably can get is to create a functor:



    #include <iostream>

    int main()
    int x;
    int y;

    auto z = [&x, &y] return x + y; ; // a lambda capturing x and y

    while(true)
    std::cin >> x;
    std::cin >> y;
    std::cout << z() << "n";







    share|improve this answer



























      18














      The closest you probably can get is to create a functor:



      #include <iostream>

      int main()
      int x;
      int y;

      auto z = [&x, &y] return x + y; ; // a lambda capturing x and y

      while(true)
      std::cin >> x;
      std::cin >> y;
      std::cout << z() << "n";







      share|improve this answer

























        18












        18








        18







        The closest you probably can get is to create a functor:



        #include <iostream>

        int main()
        int x;
        int y;

        auto z = [&x, &y] return x + y; ; // a lambda capturing x and y

        while(true)
        std::cin >> x;
        std::cin >> y;
        std::cout << z() << "n";







        share|improve this answer













        The closest you probably can get is to create a functor:



        #include <iostream>

        int main()
        int x;
        int y;

        auto z = [&x, &y] return x + y; ; // a lambda capturing x and y

        while(true)
        std::cin >> x;
        std::cin >> y;
        std::cout << z() << "n";








        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 days ago









        Ted LyngmoTed Lyngmo

        3,5982522




        3,5982522





















            10














            There are two chief techniques:



            1. Deferred calculation - instead of z being a simple variable, make it a function which calculates the value on demand (see other answers for examples). This can be source-code transparent if z is some proxy object with implicit conversion to the required type (as in Aconcagua's answer).


            2. Explicit notification of changes. This requires x and y to be observable types; when either changes value, then z updates itself (and notifies its observers if applicable).


            The first version is usually preferred, but the second may be more appropriate if you need z to be an observable type.






            share|improve this answer

























            • The observation approach is interesting, too, if calculations to be done are expensive. Appropriately implemented, I consider it more elegant than the caching proposed by NathanOliver...

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday






            • 2





              @Aconcagua, amend that to: if calculations to be done are expensive and reads are more frequent than updates. Otherwise, we need to add a way to avoid computing values that don't get used.

              – Toby Speight
              yesterday















            10














            There are two chief techniques:



            1. Deferred calculation - instead of z being a simple variable, make it a function which calculates the value on demand (see other answers for examples). This can be source-code transparent if z is some proxy object with implicit conversion to the required type (as in Aconcagua's answer).


            2. Explicit notification of changes. This requires x and y to be observable types; when either changes value, then z updates itself (and notifies its observers if applicable).


            The first version is usually preferred, but the second may be more appropriate if you need z to be an observable type.






            share|improve this answer

























            • The observation approach is interesting, too, if calculations to be done are expensive. Appropriately implemented, I consider it more elegant than the caching proposed by NathanOliver...

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday






            • 2





              @Aconcagua, amend that to: if calculations to be done are expensive and reads are more frequent than updates. Otherwise, we need to add a way to avoid computing values that don't get used.

              – Toby Speight
              yesterday













            10












            10








            10







            There are two chief techniques:



            1. Deferred calculation - instead of z being a simple variable, make it a function which calculates the value on demand (see other answers for examples). This can be source-code transparent if z is some proxy object with implicit conversion to the required type (as in Aconcagua's answer).


            2. Explicit notification of changes. This requires x and y to be observable types; when either changes value, then z updates itself (and notifies its observers if applicable).


            The first version is usually preferred, but the second may be more appropriate if you need z to be an observable type.






            share|improve this answer















            There are two chief techniques:



            1. Deferred calculation - instead of z being a simple variable, make it a function which calculates the value on demand (see other answers for examples). This can be source-code transparent if z is some proxy object with implicit conversion to the required type (as in Aconcagua's answer).


            2. Explicit notification of changes. This requires x and y to be observable types; when either changes value, then z updates itself (and notifies its observers if applicable).


            The first version is usually preferred, but the second may be more appropriate if you need z to be an observable type.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited yesterday

























            answered 2 days ago









            Toby SpeightToby Speight

            17.3k134368




            17.3k134368












            • The observation approach is interesting, too, if calculations to be done are expensive. Appropriately implemented, I consider it more elegant than the caching proposed by NathanOliver...

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday






            • 2





              @Aconcagua, amend that to: if calculations to be done are expensive and reads are more frequent than updates. Otherwise, we need to add a way to avoid computing values that don't get used.

              – Toby Speight
              yesterday

















            • The observation approach is interesting, too, if calculations to be done are expensive. Appropriately implemented, I consider it more elegant than the caching proposed by NathanOliver...

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday






            • 2





              @Aconcagua, amend that to: if calculations to be done are expensive and reads are more frequent than updates. Otherwise, we need to add a way to avoid computing values that don't get used.

              – Toby Speight
              yesterday
















            The observation approach is interesting, too, if calculations to be done are expensive. Appropriately implemented, I consider it more elegant than the caching proposed by NathanOliver...

            – Aconcagua
            yesterday





            The observation approach is interesting, too, if calculations to be done are expensive. Appropriately implemented, I consider it more elegant than the caching proposed by NathanOliver...

            – Aconcagua
            yesterday




            2




            2





            @Aconcagua, amend that to: if calculations to be done are expensive and reads are more frequent than updates. Otherwise, we need to add a way to avoid computing values that don't get used.

            – Toby Speight
            yesterday





            @Aconcagua, amend that to: if calculations to be done are expensive and reads are more frequent than updates. Otherwise, we need to add a way to avoid computing values that don't get used.

            – Toby Speight
            yesterday











            5














            This sounds like the XY problem (pun intended).



            From the sound of it, you are not really writing code according to good object oriented practices. I would advise you not to use the "tricks" other people have suggested, but to actually learn how to make better use of OO structure.



            Before I go into that, note that assignment is distinct from an equality relation. The = in C++ is assignment, which is not the same as the = in maths. There are some (but not many) programming languages that do support equality relations, but C++ is not one of them. The thing is, adding support for equality relations introduces a heap of new challenges, so it's not as simple as "why isn't it in C++ yet".



            Anyway, in this case, you should probably be encapsulating your related variables in a class. Then you can use methods to obtain the "up-to-date" information. For example:



            class Player 
            std::vector<int> inventory;
            int cash;
            public:
            int inventory_total();
            int net_worth();


            //adds up total value of inventory
            int Player::inventory_total()
            int total = 0;
            for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = inventory.begin(); it != inventory.end(); ++it)
            total += *it;

            return total;


            //calculates net worth
            int Player::net_worth()
            //we are using inventory_total() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the inventory values
            return inventory_total() + cash;



            ...


            //we are using net_worth() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the cash and total holdings
            std::cout << player1.net_worth();


            I admit that adding this behaviour to a class is quite a bit more complicated than saying z = x + y, but it really is only a few extra lines of code.




            That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.




            In this case the object doesn't have a net_worth member variable, so you can't accidentally use it instead of calling the function.






            share|improve this answer

























            • can you give me the pros and cons of using lambdas vs this? which would be better practice?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              Yes, this is the (real) answer I would expect. Unfortunately, there is FGITW (I think it is a real problem).

              – Peter Mortensen
              yesterday















            5














            This sounds like the XY problem (pun intended).



            From the sound of it, you are not really writing code according to good object oriented practices. I would advise you not to use the "tricks" other people have suggested, but to actually learn how to make better use of OO structure.



            Before I go into that, note that assignment is distinct from an equality relation. The = in C++ is assignment, which is not the same as the = in maths. There are some (but not many) programming languages that do support equality relations, but C++ is not one of them. The thing is, adding support for equality relations introduces a heap of new challenges, so it's not as simple as "why isn't it in C++ yet".



            Anyway, in this case, you should probably be encapsulating your related variables in a class. Then you can use methods to obtain the "up-to-date" information. For example:



            class Player 
            std::vector<int> inventory;
            int cash;
            public:
            int inventory_total();
            int net_worth();


            //adds up total value of inventory
            int Player::inventory_total()
            int total = 0;
            for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = inventory.begin(); it != inventory.end(); ++it)
            total += *it;

            return total;


            //calculates net worth
            int Player::net_worth()
            //we are using inventory_total() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the inventory values
            return inventory_total() + cash;



            ...


            //we are using net_worth() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the cash and total holdings
            std::cout << player1.net_worth();


            I admit that adding this behaviour to a class is quite a bit more complicated than saying z = x + y, but it really is only a few extra lines of code.




            That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.




            In this case the object doesn't have a net_worth member variable, so you can't accidentally use it instead of calling the function.






            share|improve this answer

























            • can you give me the pros and cons of using lambdas vs this? which would be better practice?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              Yes, this is the (real) answer I would expect. Unfortunately, there is FGITW (I think it is a real problem).

              – Peter Mortensen
              yesterday













            5












            5








            5







            This sounds like the XY problem (pun intended).



            From the sound of it, you are not really writing code according to good object oriented practices. I would advise you not to use the "tricks" other people have suggested, but to actually learn how to make better use of OO structure.



            Before I go into that, note that assignment is distinct from an equality relation. The = in C++ is assignment, which is not the same as the = in maths. There are some (but not many) programming languages that do support equality relations, but C++ is not one of them. The thing is, adding support for equality relations introduces a heap of new challenges, so it's not as simple as "why isn't it in C++ yet".



            Anyway, in this case, you should probably be encapsulating your related variables in a class. Then you can use methods to obtain the "up-to-date" information. For example:



            class Player 
            std::vector<int> inventory;
            int cash;
            public:
            int inventory_total();
            int net_worth();


            //adds up total value of inventory
            int Player::inventory_total()
            int total = 0;
            for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = inventory.begin(); it != inventory.end(); ++it)
            total += *it;

            return total;


            //calculates net worth
            int Player::net_worth()
            //we are using inventory_total() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the inventory values
            return inventory_total() + cash;



            ...


            //we are using net_worth() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the cash and total holdings
            std::cout << player1.net_worth();


            I admit that adding this behaviour to a class is quite a bit more complicated than saying z = x + y, but it really is only a few extra lines of code.




            That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.




            In this case the object doesn't have a net_worth member variable, so you can't accidentally use it instead of calling the function.






            share|improve this answer















            This sounds like the XY problem (pun intended).



            From the sound of it, you are not really writing code according to good object oriented practices. I would advise you not to use the "tricks" other people have suggested, but to actually learn how to make better use of OO structure.



            Before I go into that, note that assignment is distinct from an equality relation. The = in C++ is assignment, which is not the same as the = in maths. There are some (but not many) programming languages that do support equality relations, but C++ is not one of them. The thing is, adding support for equality relations introduces a heap of new challenges, so it's not as simple as "why isn't it in C++ yet".



            Anyway, in this case, you should probably be encapsulating your related variables in a class. Then you can use methods to obtain the "up-to-date" information. For example:



            class Player 
            std::vector<int> inventory;
            int cash;
            public:
            int inventory_total();
            int net_worth();


            //adds up total value of inventory
            int Player::inventory_total()
            int total = 0;
            for(std::vector<int>::iterator it = inventory.begin(); it != inventory.end(); ++it)
            total += *it;

            return total;


            //calculates net worth
            int Player::net_worth()
            //we are using inventory_total() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the inventory values
            return inventory_total() + cash;



            ...


            //we are using net_worth() as if it were a variable that automatically
            //holds the sum of the cash and total holdings
            std::cout << player1.net_worth();


            I admit that adding this behaviour to a class is quite a bit more complicated than saying z = x + y, but it really is only a few extra lines of code.




            That would be very annoying and error prone if you forgot to call the function somewhere.




            In this case the object doesn't have a net_worth member variable, so you can't accidentally use it instead of calling the function.







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited yesterday









            ShadowRanger

            63.3k660100




            63.3k660100










            answered yesterday









            ArteliusArtelius

            41.4k87895




            41.4k87895












            • can you give me the pros and cons of using lambdas vs this? which would be better practice?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              Yes, this is the (real) answer I would expect. Unfortunately, there is FGITW (I think it is a real problem).

              – Peter Mortensen
              yesterday

















            • can you give me the pros and cons of using lambdas vs this? which would be better practice?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              Yes, this is the (real) answer I would expect. Unfortunately, there is FGITW (I think it is a real problem).

              – Peter Mortensen
              yesterday
















            can you give me the pros and cons of using lambdas vs this? which would be better practice?

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            yesterday





            can you give me the pros and cons of using lambdas vs this? which would be better practice?

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            yesterday




            1




            1





            Yes, this is the (real) answer I would expect. Unfortunately, there is FGITW (I think it is a real problem).

            – Peter Mortensen
            yesterday





            Yes, this is the (real) answer I would expect. Unfortunately, there is FGITW (I think it is a real problem).

            – Peter Mortensen
            yesterday











            3














            1. You create a function for that.

            2. You call the function with the appropriate arguments when you need the value.



            int z(int x, int y)

            return (x + y);



            int x;
            int y;

            // This does ot work
            // int zx + y;

            cin >> x;
            cin >> y;
            cout << z(x, y);





            share|improve this answer


















            • 1





              yes, i mean the only way to get z updated is to call that function everytime we change x and y values?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              2 days ago











            • @NayWunnaZaw, yes, that is correct.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw, you can avoid the repeated use of x and y by using a lambda function, as shown by Nathan but you still have to make the call.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 4





              @NayWunnaZaw To complete the issue: Even with my solution, there is a function call (to the cast operator!), just that it is implicit and not required explicitly...

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago















            3














            1. You create a function for that.

            2. You call the function with the appropriate arguments when you need the value.



            int z(int x, int y)

            return (x + y);



            int x;
            int y;

            // This does ot work
            // int zx + y;

            cin >> x;
            cin >> y;
            cout << z(x, y);





            share|improve this answer


















            • 1





              yes, i mean the only way to get z updated is to call that function everytime we change x and y values?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              2 days ago











            • @NayWunnaZaw, yes, that is correct.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw, you can avoid the repeated use of x and y by using a lambda function, as shown by Nathan but you still have to make the call.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 4





              @NayWunnaZaw To complete the issue: Even with my solution, there is a function call (to the cast operator!), just that it is implicit and not required explicitly...

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago













            3












            3








            3







            1. You create a function for that.

            2. You call the function with the appropriate arguments when you need the value.



            int z(int x, int y)

            return (x + y);



            int x;
            int y;

            // This does ot work
            // int zx + y;

            cin >> x;
            cin >> y;
            cout << z(x, y);





            share|improve this answer













            1. You create a function for that.

            2. You call the function with the appropriate arguments when you need the value.



            int z(int x, int y)

            return (x + y);



            int x;
            int y;

            // This does ot work
            // int zx + y;

            cin >> x;
            cin >> y;
            cout << z(x, y);






            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 2 days ago









            R SahuR Sahu

            170k1294193




            170k1294193







            • 1





              yes, i mean the only way to get z updated is to call that function everytime we change x and y values?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              2 days ago











            • @NayWunnaZaw, yes, that is correct.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw, you can avoid the repeated use of x and y by using a lambda function, as shown by Nathan but you still have to make the call.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 4





              @NayWunnaZaw To complete the issue: Even with my solution, there is a function call (to the cast operator!), just that it is implicit and not required explicitly...

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago












            • 1





              yes, i mean the only way to get z updated is to call that function everytime we change x and y values?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              2 days ago











            • @NayWunnaZaw, yes, that is correct.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw, you can avoid the repeated use of x and y by using a lambda function, as shown by Nathan but you still have to make the call.

              – R Sahu
              2 days ago






            • 4





              @NayWunnaZaw To complete the issue: Even with my solution, there is a function call (to the cast operator!), just that it is implicit and not required explicitly...

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago







            1




            1





            yes, i mean the only way to get z updated is to call that function everytime we change x and y values?

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            2 days ago





            yes, i mean the only way to get z updated is to call that function everytime we change x and y values?

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            2 days ago













            @NayWunnaZaw, yes, that is correct.

            – R Sahu
            2 days ago





            @NayWunnaZaw, yes, that is correct.

            – R Sahu
            2 days ago




            1




            1





            @NayWunnaZaw, you can avoid the repeated use of x and y by using a lambda function, as shown by Nathan but you still have to make the call.

            – R Sahu
            2 days ago





            @NayWunnaZaw, you can avoid the repeated use of x and y by using a lambda function, as shown by Nathan but you still have to make the call.

            – R Sahu
            2 days ago




            4




            4





            @NayWunnaZaw To complete the issue: Even with my solution, there is a function call (to the cast operator!), just that it is implicit and not required explicitly...

            – Aconcagua
            2 days ago





            @NayWunnaZaw To complete the issue: Even with my solution, there is a function call (to the cast operator!), just that it is implicit and not required explicitly...

            – Aconcagua
            2 days ago











            2














            You can define the following lambda z which always returns the current value of x+y because x and y are captured by reference:



            DEMO



            int main()

            int x;
            int y;

            const auto z = [&x, &y]() return x+y; ;

            std::cin >> x; // 1
            std::cin >> y; // 2
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 3

            std::cin >> x; // 3
            std::cin >> y; // 4
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 7






            share|improve this answer




















            • 2





              Don't use parentheses around return values – return is not a function, and in worst case, the parentheses can even create a dangling reference (with return type being decltype(auto)).

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago











            • @Aconcagua thx! you are right. I edited my answer.

              – Hiroki
              2 days ago












            • Why downvoted ? At least I posted my answer faster than Ted with my tested code. Hmm... :)

              – Hiroki
              yesterday







            • 1





              Well, I didn't and wouldn't have considered the parentheses worth doing so either. If they were the reason – well, people tend to never come back to remove a DV even if the answer was fixed, so (I don't think there's a notification for either, so people might just not even recognise...)

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday











            • @Aconcagua thx for your comment. Although I was downvoted after few hours later of my edition, I was relieved to hear your words.

              – Hiroki
              yesterday















            2














            You can define the following lambda z which always returns the current value of x+y because x and y are captured by reference:



            DEMO



            int main()

            int x;
            int y;

            const auto z = [&x, &y]() return x+y; ;

            std::cin >> x; // 1
            std::cin >> y; // 2
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 3

            std::cin >> x; // 3
            std::cin >> y; // 4
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 7






            share|improve this answer




















            • 2





              Don't use parentheses around return values – return is not a function, and in worst case, the parentheses can even create a dangling reference (with return type being decltype(auto)).

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago











            • @Aconcagua thx! you are right. I edited my answer.

              – Hiroki
              2 days ago












            • Why downvoted ? At least I posted my answer faster than Ted with my tested code. Hmm... :)

              – Hiroki
              yesterday







            • 1





              Well, I didn't and wouldn't have considered the parentheses worth doing so either. If they were the reason – well, people tend to never come back to remove a DV even if the answer was fixed, so (I don't think there's a notification for either, so people might just not even recognise...)

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday











            • @Aconcagua thx for your comment. Although I was downvoted after few hours later of my edition, I was relieved to hear your words.

              – Hiroki
              yesterday













            2












            2








            2







            You can define the following lambda z which always returns the current value of x+y because x and y are captured by reference:



            DEMO



            int main()

            int x;
            int y;

            const auto z = [&x, &y]() return x+y; ;

            std::cin >> x; // 1
            std::cin >> y; // 2
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 3

            std::cin >> x; // 3
            std::cin >> y; // 4
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 7






            share|improve this answer















            You can define the following lambda z which always returns the current value of x+y because x and y are captured by reference:



            DEMO



            int main()

            int x;
            int y;

            const auto z = [&x, &y]() return x+y; ;

            std::cin >> x; // 1
            std::cin >> y; // 2
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 3

            std::cin >> x; // 3
            std::cin >> y; // 4
            std::cout << z() << std::endl; // 7







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited yesterday

























            answered 2 days ago









            HirokiHiroki

            2,1503420




            2,1503420







            • 2





              Don't use parentheses around return values – return is not a function, and in worst case, the parentheses can even create a dangling reference (with return type being decltype(auto)).

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago











            • @Aconcagua thx! you are right. I edited my answer.

              – Hiroki
              2 days ago












            • Why downvoted ? At least I posted my answer faster than Ted with my tested code. Hmm... :)

              – Hiroki
              yesterday







            • 1





              Well, I didn't and wouldn't have considered the parentheses worth doing so either. If they were the reason – well, people tend to never come back to remove a DV even if the answer was fixed, so (I don't think there's a notification for either, so people might just not even recognise...)

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday











            • @Aconcagua thx for your comment. Although I was downvoted after few hours later of my edition, I was relieved to hear your words.

              – Hiroki
              yesterday












            • 2





              Don't use parentheses around return values – return is not a function, and in worst case, the parentheses can even create a dangling reference (with return type being decltype(auto)).

              – Aconcagua
              2 days ago











            • @Aconcagua thx! you are right. I edited my answer.

              – Hiroki
              2 days ago












            • Why downvoted ? At least I posted my answer faster than Ted with my tested code. Hmm... :)

              – Hiroki
              yesterday







            • 1





              Well, I didn't and wouldn't have considered the parentheses worth doing so either. If they were the reason – well, people tend to never come back to remove a DV even if the answer was fixed, so (I don't think there's a notification for either, so people might just not even recognise...)

              – Aconcagua
              yesterday











            • @Aconcagua thx for your comment. Although I was downvoted after few hours later of my edition, I was relieved to hear your words.

              – Hiroki
              yesterday







            2




            2





            Don't use parentheses around return values – return is not a function, and in worst case, the parentheses can even create a dangling reference (with return type being decltype(auto)).

            – Aconcagua
            2 days ago





            Don't use parentheses around return values – return is not a function, and in worst case, the parentheses can even create a dangling reference (with return type being decltype(auto)).

            – Aconcagua
            2 days ago













            @Aconcagua thx! you are right. I edited my answer.

            – Hiroki
            2 days ago






            @Aconcagua thx! you are right. I edited my answer.

            – Hiroki
            2 days ago














            Why downvoted ? At least I posted my answer faster than Ted with my tested code. Hmm... :)

            – Hiroki
            yesterday






            Why downvoted ? At least I posted my answer faster than Ted with my tested code. Hmm... :)

            – Hiroki
            yesterday





            1




            1





            Well, I didn't and wouldn't have considered the parentheses worth doing so either. If they were the reason – well, people tend to never come back to remove a DV even if the answer was fixed, so (I don't think there's a notification for either, so people might just not even recognise...)

            – Aconcagua
            yesterday





            Well, I didn't and wouldn't have considered the parentheses worth doing so either. If they were the reason – well, people tend to never come back to remove a DV even if the answer was fixed, so (I don't think there's a notification for either, so people might just not even recognise...)

            – Aconcagua
            yesterday













            @Aconcagua thx for your comment. Although I was downvoted after few hours later of my edition, I was relieved to hear your words.

            – Hiroki
            yesterday





            @Aconcagua thx for your comment. Although I was downvoted after few hours later of my edition, I was relieved to hear your words.

            – Hiroki
            yesterday











            1














            So a big problem that I see with the lambda solutions provided is that z is calculated each time that it is inspected even if neither x nor y has changed. To get around this you really need to link these variables.
            I would suggest doing that via class:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            calculate();

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            calculate();

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const return z;
            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.calculate();
            return lhs;



            This will recalculate z each time x or y is set. This is a good solution if you access z frequently, and x and y are set infrequently. If x and y are set frequently or calculate is expensive you might consider:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            bool dirty;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const
            if(dirty)
            calculate();

            return z;

            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.dirty = true;
            return lhs;



            Note that I've included an extraction operator, so whichever you choose your code can turn into something as simple as:



            foo xyz;

            cin >> xyz;
            cout << xyz.get_z();





            share|improve this answer























            • I don't quite understand how lambda work. But if you've played dota you'd know how gold in the game work. The way it is displayed all the time and adding 1 gold every split-second. I'm asking this question with that in mind. How do I implement that in c++?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw I mean generally you're going to have a main class which calls the tick function on any class that needs live updating, passing in a time elapsed since last tick parameter. You'd probably have a player class instead of just the simple foo which would do loads of things. Like the player class's tick would need to update the damage of poison effects, calculate cooldown times, and also calculate gold. I recognize this is probably a gross over simplification. But I do think you're going to want to go with a class here.

              – Jonathan Mee
              yesterday











            • thanks for that, but I like lambda answer more for it's simplicity for a variable. and that fits my question. And class type solution should be used instead if we plan on using the equation more than once like shadowranger said up there.

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday















            1














            So a big problem that I see with the lambda solutions provided is that z is calculated each time that it is inspected even if neither x nor y has changed. To get around this you really need to link these variables.
            I would suggest doing that via class:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            calculate();

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            calculate();

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const return z;
            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.calculate();
            return lhs;



            This will recalculate z each time x or y is set. This is a good solution if you access z frequently, and x and y are set infrequently. If x and y are set frequently or calculate is expensive you might consider:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            bool dirty;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const
            if(dirty)
            calculate();

            return z;

            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.dirty = true;
            return lhs;



            Note that I've included an extraction operator, so whichever you choose your code can turn into something as simple as:



            foo xyz;

            cin >> xyz;
            cout << xyz.get_z();





            share|improve this answer























            • I don't quite understand how lambda work. But if you've played dota you'd know how gold in the game work. The way it is displayed all the time and adding 1 gold every split-second. I'm asking this question with that in mind. How do I implement that in c++?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw I mean generally you're going to have a main class which calls the tick function on any class that needs live updating, passing in a time elapsed since last tick parameter. You'd probably have a player class instead of just the simple foo which would do loads of things. Like the player class's tick would need to update the damage of poison effects, calculate cooldown times, and also calculate gold. I recognize this is probably a gross over simplification. But I do think you're going to want to go with a class here.

              – Jonathan Mee
              yesterday











            • thanks for that, but I like lambda answer more for it's simplicity for a variable. and that fits my question. And class type solution should be used instead if we plan on using the equation more than once like shadowranger said up there.

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday













            1












            1








            1







            So a big problem that I see with the lambda solutions provided is that z is calculated each time that it is inspected even if neither x nor y has changed. To get around this you really need to link these variables.
            I would suggest doing that via class:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            calculate();

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            calculate();

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const return z;
            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.calculate();
            return lhs;



            This will recalculate z each time x or y is set. This is a good solution if you access z frequently, and x and y are set infrequently. If x and y are set frequently or calculate is expensive you might consider:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            bool dirty;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const
            if(dirty)
            calculate();

            return z;

            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.dirty = true;
            return lhs;



            Note that I've included an extraction operator, so whichever you choose your code can turn into something as simple as:



            foo xyz;

            cin >> xyz;
            cout << xyz.get_z();





            share|improve this answer













            So a big problem that I see with the lambda solutions provided is that z is calculated each time that it is inspected even if neither x nor y has changed. To get around this you really need to link these variables.
            I would suggest doing that via class:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            calculate();

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            calculate();

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const return z;
            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.calculate();
            return lhs;



            This will recalculate z each time x or y is set. This is a good solution if you access z frequently, and x and y are set infrequently. If x and y are set frequently or calculate is expensive you might consider:



            class foo 
            int x;
            int y;
            int z;
            bool dirty;
            void calculate() z = (x + y) / 2;
            friend istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs);
            public:
            void set_x(const int param)
            x = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_x() const return x;
            void set_y(const int param)
            y = param;
            dirty = true;

            int get_y() const return y;
            int get_z() const
            if(dirty)
            calculate();

            return z;

            ;

            istream& operator >>(istream& lhs, foo& rhs)
            lhs >> rhs.x >> rhs.y;
            rhs.dirty = true;
            return lhs;



            Note that I've included an extraction operator, so whichever you choose your code can turn into something as simple as:



            foo xyz;

            cin >> xyz;
            cout << xyz.get_z();






            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            Jonathan MeeJonathan Mee

            22k1066176




            22k1066176












            • I don't quite understand how lambda work. But if you've played dota you'd know how gold in the game work. The way it is displayed all the time and adding 1 gold every split-second. I'm asking this question with that in mind. How do I implement that in c++?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw I mean generally you're going to have a main class which calls the tick function on any class that needs live updating, passing in a time elapsed since last tick parameter. You'd probably have a player class instead of just the simple foo which would do loads of things. Like the player class's tick would need to update the damage of poison effects, calculate cooldown times, and also calculate gold. I recognize this is probably a gross over simplification. But I do think you're going to want to go with a class here.

              – Jonathan Mee
              yesterday











            • thanks for that, but I like lambda answer more for it's simplicity for a variable. and that fits my question. And class type solution should be used instead if we plan on using the equation more than once like shadowranger said up there.

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday

















            • I don't quite understand how lambda work. But if you've played dota you'd know how gold in the game work. The way it is displayed all the time and adding 1 gold every split-second. I'm asking this question with that in mind. How do I implement that in c++?

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday






            • 1





              @NayWunnaZaw I mean generally you're going to have a main class which calls the tick function on any class that needs live updating, passing in a time elapsed since last tick parameter. You'd probably have a player class instead of just the simple foo which would do loads of things. Like the player class's tick would need to update the damage of poison effects, calculate cooldown times, and also calculate gold. I recognize this is probably a gross over simplification. But I do think you're going to want to go with a class here.

              – Jonathan Mee
              yesterday











            • thanks for that, but I like lambda answer more for it's simplicity for a variable. and that fits my question. And class type solution should be used instead if we plan on using the equation more than once like shadowranger said up there.

              – Nay Wunna Zaw
              yesterday
















            I don't quite understand how lambda work. But if you've played dota you'd know how gold in the game work. The way it is displayed all the time and adding 1 gold every split-second. I'm asking this question with that in mind. How do I implement that in c++?

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            yesterday





            I don't quite understand how lambda work. But if you've played dota you'd know how gold in the game work. The way it is displayed all the time and adding 1 gold every split-second. I'm asking this question with that in mind. How do I implement that in c++?

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            yesterday




            1




            1





            @NayWunnaZaw I mean generally you're going to have a main class which calls the tick function on any class that needs live updating, passing in a time elapsed since last tick parameter. You'd probably have a player class instead of just the simple foo which would do loads of things. Like the player class's tick would need to update the damage of poison effects, calculate cooldown times, and also calculate gold. I recognize this is probably a gross over simplification. But I do think you're going to want to go with a class here.

            – Jonathan Mee
            yesterday





            @NayWunnaZaw I mean generally you're going to have a main class which calls the tick function on any class that needs live updating, passing in a time elapsed since last tick parameter. You'd probably have a player class instead of just the simple foo which would do loads of things. Like the player class's tick would need to update the damage of poison effects, calculate cooldown times, and also calculate gold. I recognize this is probably a gross over simplification. But I do think you're going to want to go with a class here.

            – Jonathan Mee
            yesterday













            thanks for that, but I like lambda answer more for it's simplicity for a variable. and that fits my question. And class type solution should be used instead if we plan on using the equation more than once like shadowranger said up there.

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            yesterday





            thanks for that, but I like lambda answer more for it's simplicity for a variable. and that fits my question. And class type solution should be used instead if we plan on using the equation more than once like shadowranger said up there.

            – Nay Wunna Zaw
            yesterday











            0














            You can get what you're asking for by using macros:




            int x, y;
            #define z (x + y)
            /* use x, y, z */
            #undef z



            The #undef is for a little sanity. For more sanity, don't use macros at all, and go with one of the other answers, and deal with the extra verbosity.



            Although a class with a custom operator int would work in a lot of cases ... hmm.






            share|improve this answer























            • Although this could use an EXTREME CAUTION warning, I think it is worth mentioning. Sometimes quick'n'dirty is called for. I have used tricks like this to save time in programming competitions, or in mindless repetitive matrix calculations that would be a lot more verbose and/or bug-prone using any other approach.

              – Artelius
              yesterday
















            0














            You can get what you're asking for by using macros:




            int x, y;
            #define z (x + y)
            /* use x, y, z */
            #undef z



            The #undef is for a little sanity. For more sanity, don't use macros at all, and go with one of the other answers, and deal with the extra verbosity.



            Although a class with a custom operator int would work in a lot of cases ... hmm.






            share|improve this answer























            • Although this could use an EXTREME CAUTION warning, I think it is worth mentioning. Sometimes quick'n'dirty is called for. I have used tricks like this to save time in programming competitions, or in mindless repetitive matrix calculations that would be a lot more verbose and/or bug-prone using any other approach.

              – Artelius
              yesterday














            0












            0








            0







            You can get what you're asking for by using macros:




            int x, y;
            #define z (x + y)
            /* use x, y, z */
            #undef z



            The #undef is for a little sanity. For more sanity, don't use macros at all, and go with one of the other answers, and deal with the extra verbosity.



            Although a class with a custom operator int would work in a lot of cases ... hmm.






            share|improve this answer













            You can get what you're asking for by using macros:




            int x, y;
            #define z (x + y)
            /* use x, y, z */
            #undef z



            The #undef is for a little sanity. For more sanity, don't use macros at all, and go with one of the other answers, and deal with the extra verbosity.



            Although a class with a custom operator int would work in a lot of cases ... hmm.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 2 days ago









            o11co11c

            10.9k43155




            10.9k43155












            • Although this could use an EXTREME CAUTION warning, I think it is worth mentioning. Sometimes quick'n'dirty is called for. I have used tricks like this to save time in programming competitions, or in mindless repetitive matrix calculations that would be a lot more verbose and/or bug-prone using any other approach.

              – Artelius
              yesterday


















            • Although this could use an EXTREME CAUTION warning, I think it is worth mentioning. Sometimes quick'n'dirty is called for. I have used tricks like this to save time in programming competitions, or in mindless repetitive matrix calculations that would be a lot more verbose and/or bug-prone using any other approach.

              – Artelius
              yesterday

















            Although this could use an EXTREME CAUTION warning, I think it is worth mentioning. Sometimes quick'n'dirty is called for. I have used tricks like this to save time in programming competitions, or in mindless repetitive matrix calculations that would be a lot more verbose and/or bug-prone using any other approach.

            – Artelius
            yesterday






            Although this could use an EXTREME CAUTION warning, I think it is worth mentioning. Sometimes quick'n'dirty is called for. I have used tricks like this to save time in programming competitions, or in mindless repetitive matrix calculations that would be a lot more verbose and/or bug-prone using any other approach.

            – Artelius
            yesterday











            Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











            Nay Wunna Zaw is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














            Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


            • 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.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55402807%2fhow-do-i-make-a-variable-always-equal-to-the-result-of-some-calculations%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Sum ergo cogito? 1 nng

            419 nièngy_Soadمي 19bal1.5o_g

            Queiggey Chernihivv 9NnOo i Zw X QqKk LpB