Using Pointer to Members on STL Algorithms

Sometimes I need to execute an operation, like std::sort or std::transform, on a container of structs or objects using a lambda or function pointers which should take type defined criteria. Another scenario might be a global minima search of an arbitrary brane which could be described by a vector of 3-dimensional vectors. In such cases, we often use pointer to members.

This topic might be a piece of cake for every experienced C++ veteran. But I remember back in the days when I was a novice, I was really irritated by a piece of code which was using pointer to members, to do a special operation. I didn’t get what that piece of sh*t was doing and why it was written that wired. And even worse, it was neither easy to find documentation of that code, nor information of such “magic” it was doing on the internet.

So how might something like this look like? Let’s say we have a vector of complex numbers which we want to sort by either the real or the imaginary number. This is our complex type:

For sorting vectors, we would use std::sort of course and for vectors of primitive types, it’s rather simple to use. And indeed, it’s easy to use with complex types as well. Because std::sort is offering an interface which is taking a compare function object that has to fulfill the requirements of Compare:

Using std::sort for sorting according to real or imaginary numbers might then look like this:

The interesting point in the code above is the declaration of double Complex::*var (pointer to member of Complex of type double), in line 6, which is passed to the lambda over the captures clause. The lambda function is using the pointer by dereferencing it to a comparable type (in our case a double) in line 7. It’s then used by assigning it a concrete pointer in line 9 and 12 to steer the std::sort algorithm.

For me, such indirections are sometimes quite useful but not always. The biggest problem might be the readability for programming beginners. Also, there might be a better way to have the same functionality without pointers to members. I would be glad to hear any suggestions or feedback.

Did you like this post?

What are your thoughts on this post?

Feel free to comment and share the post.

4 thoughts on “Using Pointer to Members on STL Algorithms

  1. Why not create two separate comparator lambdas, one that compares by real, other by imaginary part? The pointer to member approach and reference to `var` feel wrong to me. Instead do:

    auto compByReal = []()(const Complex& a, const Complex& b) { return a.real < b.real; }

    auto compByImaginary = []()(const Complex& a, const Complex& b) { return a.img < b.img; }


    1. Yes Martin, you’re right and i agree. In this example it’s quite a bit over engineered. But in daylight live I’m facing quite often pure (and even nested) data structs with several dozens of fields. In such cases it seemed to be valid to use pointer to members. I could imagine there might be also a way to handle such things over a template, but I didn’t investigate till now. Do you have an opinion?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.