Internal typedefs in C++ - good style or bad style?

c++ coding-style typedef
Will Baker picture Will Baker · Apr 17, 2009 · Viewed 84.6k times · Source

Something I have found myself doing often lately is declaring typedefs relevant to a particular class inside that class, i.e.

class Lorem
{
    typedef boost::shared_ptr<Lorem> ptr;
    typedef std::vector<Lorem::ptr>  vector;

//
// ...
//
};

These types are then used elsewhere in the code:

Lorem::vector lorems;
Lorem::ptr    lorem( new Lorem() );

lorems.push_back( lorem );

Reasons I like it:

  • It reduces the noise introduced by the class templates, std::vector<Lorem> becomes Lorem::vector, etc.
  • It serves as a statement of intent - in the example above, the Lorem class is intended to be reference counted via boost::shared_ptr and stored in a vector.
  • It allows the implementation to change - i.e. if Lorem needed to be changed to be intrusively reference counted (via boost::intrusive_ptr) at a later stage then this would have minimal impact to the code.
  • I think it looks 'prettier' and is arguably easier to read.

Reasons I don't like it:

  • There are sometimes issues with dependencies - if you want to embed, say, a Lorem::vector within another class but only need (or want) to forward declare Lorem (as opposed to introducing a dependency on its header file) then you end up having to use the explicit types (e.g. boost::shared_ptr<Lorem> rather than Lorem::ptr), which is a little inconsistent.
  • It may not be very common, and hence harder to understand?

I try to be objective with my coding style, so it would be good to get some other opinions on it so I can dissect my thinking a little bit.

Answer

anon picture anon · Apr 17, 2009

I think it is excellent style, and I use it myself. It is always best to limit the scope of names as much as possible, and use of classes is the best way to do this in C++. For example, the C++ Standard library makes heavy use of typedefs within classes.

Related questions

Iterate through a C++ Vector using a 'for' loop

I am new to the C++ language. I have been starting to use vectors, and have noticed that in all of the code I see to iterate though a vector via indices, the first parameter of the for loop is …

Read More
Checking for NULL pointer in C/C++

In a recent code review, a contributor is trying to enforce that all NULL checks on pointers be performed in the following manner: int * some_ptr; // ... if (some_ptr == NULL) { // Handle null-pointer error } else { // Proceed } instead of int * some_ptr; // ... …

Read More
What is the most effective way to get the index of an iterator of an std::vector?

I'm iterating over a vector and need the index the iterator is currently pointing at. AFAIK this can be done in two ways: it - vec.begin() std::distance(vec.begin(), it) What are the pros and cons of these …

Read More