Dispatching from a runtime parameter to different overloads - c++

Suppose I have a set of types :
constexpr std::tuple<int,double,string> my_types;
a set of values to identify them:
constexpr std::array<const char*,3> my_ids = {"int","double","string"}; // const char* instead of string to be constexpr-compatible
and an overload set
template<class T> bool my_fun(my_type complex_object) { /* some treatment depending on type T */ }
I have a manually dispatching function like that:
string my_disp_fun(my_type complex_object) {
const char* id = get_info(complex_object);
using namespace std::string_literals;
if (id == "int"s) {
return my_fun<int>(complex_object);
} else if (id == "double"s) {
return my_fun<double>(complex_object);
} else if (id == "string"s) {
return my_fun<string>(complex_object);
} else {
throw;
}
}
Because I see this pattern coming again and again with a different my_fun every time, I would like to replace it by something like that:
struct my_mapping {
static constexpr std::tuple<int,double,string> my_types;
static constexpr std::array<const char*,3> my_ids = {"int","double","string"}; // const char* instead of string to be constexpr-compatible
}
string my_disp_fun(my_type complex_object) {
const char* id = get_info(complex_object);
return
dispatch<my_mapping>(
id,
my_fun // pseudo-code since my_fun is a template
);
}
How to implement the dispatch function? I am pretty confident it can be done but so far, I can't think of a reasonably nice API that would still be implementable with template metaprograming tricks.
I am sure people already had the need for this kind of problem. Is there a name for this pattern? I don't really know how to even qualify it in succinct technical terms...
Side question: is it related to the pattern matching proposal? I'm not sure because the paper seems more interested in the matching part, not generating branchs from that, right ?

Leverage variant.
template<class T>struct tag_t{using type=T};
template<class T>constexpr tag_t<T> tag={};
template<class...Ts>
using tag_enum = std::variant<tag_t<Ts>...>;
now tag_enum is a type stores a type at runtime as a value. Its runtime representation is an integer (!), but C++ knows that integer represents a specific type.
We now just have to map your strings to integers
using supported_types=tag_enum<int, double, std::string>;
std::unordered_map<std::string, supported_types> name_type_map={
{"int", tag<int>},
{"double", tag<double>},
{"string", tag<std::string>},
};
this map can be built from an array and a tuple if you want, or made global somewhere, or made into a function.
The point is, a mapping of any kind to a tag_enum can be used to auto dispatch a function.
To see how:
string my_disp_fun(my_type complex_object) {
const char* id = get_info(complex_object);
return std::visit( [&](auto tag){
return my_fun<typename decltype(tag)::type>( complex_object );
}, name_type_map[id] };
}
refactoring this to handle whatever level of automation you want should be easy.
If you adopt the convention that you pass T as a tag_t as the first argument it gets even easier to refactor.
#define RETURNS(...)\
noexcept(noexcept(__VA_ARGS__)) \
-> decltype(__VA_ARGS__) \
{ return __VA_ARGS__; }
#define MAKE_CALLER_OF(...) \
[](auto&&...args) \
RETURNS( (__VA_ARGS__)(decltype(args)(args)...) )
now you can easily wrap a template function into an object
template<class F>
auto my_disp_fun(my_type complex_object F f) {
const char* id = get_info(complex_object);
return std::visit( [&](auto tag){
return f( tag, complex_object );
}, name_type_map[id] }; // todo: handle failure to find it
}
then
std::string s = my_disp_fun(obj, MAKE_CALLER_OF(my_fun));
does the dispatch for you.
(In theory we could pass the template parameter in the macro, but the above macros are generically useful, while one that did wierd tag unpacking are not).
Also we can make a global type map.
template<class T>
using type_entry = std::pair<std::string, tag_t<T>>;
#define TYPE_ENTRY_EX(NAME, X) type_entry<X>{ NAME, tag<X> }
#define TYPE_ENTRY(X) TYPE_ENTRY_EX(#X, X)
auto TypeTable = std::make_tuple(
TYPE_ENTRY(int),
TYPE_ENTRY(double),
TYPE_ENTRY_EX("string", std::string)
);
template<class Table>
struct get_supported_types_helper;
template<class...Ts>
struct get_supported_types_helper<std::tuple<type_entry<Ts>...>> {
using type = tag_enum<Ts...>;
};
template<class Table>
using get_supported_types = typename get_supported_types_helper<Table>::type;
From that you can do things like make the unordered map from the TypeTable tuple automatically.
All of this is just to avoid having to mention the supported types twice.

Since your functions have the same signature, you can use a std::map to map the ids to function pointers, eg:
template<class T>
std::string my_fun(my_type complex_object)
{
/* some treatment depending on type T */
return ...;
}
using my_func_type = std::string(*)(my_type);
const std::map<std::string, my_func_type> my_funcs = {
{"int", &my_fun<int>},
{"double", &my_fun<double>},
{"string", &my_fun<std::string>}
};
std::string my_disp_fun(my_type complex_object)
{
const char *id = get_info(complex_object);
auto iter = my_funcs.find(id);
if (iter == my_funcs.end())
throw ...;
return iter->second(complex_object);
}
Demo

I'm not sure that this is what you are looking for. But you can do it without the need to hold an additional array with the types:
// overload visitor trick
template<class... Ts> struct overloaded : Ts... { using Ts::operator()...; };
// deduction guide
template<class... Ts> overloaded(Ts...) -> overloaded<Ts...>;
int main() {
std::tuple<int, double, const char*> tup = {10, 2.5, "hello"};
auto f = overloaded {
[](int arg){std::cout << arg << " + 3 = " << arg + 3 << std::endl;},
[](double arg){std::cout << arg << " * 2 = " << arg * 2 << std::endl;},
[](const std::string& arg){std::cout << "string: " << arg << std::endl;}
};
std::apply([&](const auto&... e){ (f(e), ...);}, tup);
}
Code: http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/3bfdd35f89ceeff9

Related

Access std::vector<std::variant> value by index

I would like to access a member of std::vector<std::variant> by index. Considering the following snippet:
struct Data {
using data_types = std::variant<std::basic_string<char>, double, int>;
public:
template <class T>
void push_back(const T& t) {
m_data.push_back(t);
}
private:
std::vector<data_types> m_data;
};
int main()
{
Data d;
d.push_back(0);
d.push_back("string");
d.push_back(3.55);
}
I would like to access the values like d[0] (should return int) or d[1] (should return std::string).
What I have tried so far but what isn't working is to add the following public method to the existing struct:
template <class T>
T& operator[](const size_t &index) {
return std::visit([](const T& value) {
return static_cast<T>(value);
}, m_data[index]);
}
Any ideas how to achieve the desired result?
The type of an expression in C++ cannot depend on runtime parameters; basically it can only depend on types of the arguments, plus non-type template arguments.
So d[0] and d[1] must have the same type, as the type of the pieces of the expression are identical, and there are no non-type template arguments.
std::get<int>(d[0]) vs std::get<double>(d[1]) can differ in type.
std::get<1>(d[0]) vs std::get<2>(d[1]) can differ in type.
std::visit is a mechanism used to get around this; here, we create every a function object call, one for each possible type, and then pick one at runtime to actually call. However, the type returned from the visit still follows the above rule: it doesn't depend on what type is stored in the variant, and every possible type in the variant must have a valid instantiation of the function.
C++ type system is not a runtime type system. It is compile-time. Stuff like variant and dynamic_cast and any give some runtime exposure to it, but it is intentionally minimal.
If you are wanting to print the contents of a variant, you can do this:
std::visit([](auto& x){
std::cout << x;
}, d[0]);
the trick here is that each of the various types of variant have a lambda function body written for them (so they all must be valid). Then, at run time, the one actually in the variant is run.
You can also test the variant and ask if it has a specific type, either via std::get or manually.
bool has_int = std::visit([](auto& x){
return std::is_same_v<int, std::decay_t<decltype(x)>>::value;
}, d[0]);
this gives you a bool saying if d[0] has an int in it or not.
The next bit is getting insane. Please don't read this unless you fully understand how to use variants and want to know more:
You can even extract out the type index of the variant and pass that around as a run time value:
template<auto I>
using konstant_t = std::integral_constant<decltype(I),I>;
template<auto I>
constexpr konstant_t<I> konstant_v{};
template<auto...Is>
using venum_t = std::variant< konstant_t<Is>... >;
template<class Is>
struct make_venum_helper;
template<class Is>
using make_venum_helper_t = typename make_venum_helper<Is>::type;
template<std::size_t...Is>
struct make_venum_helper<std::index_sequence<Is...>>{
using type=venum_t<Is...>;
};
template<std::size_t N>
using make_venum_t = typename make_venum_helper<std::make_index_sequence<N>>::type;
template<std::size_t...Is>
constexpr auto venum_v( std::index_sequence<Is...>, std::size_t I ) {
using venum = make_venum_t<sizeof...(Is)>;
constexpr venum arr[]={
venum( konstant_v<Is> )...
};
return arr[I];
}
template<std::size_t N>
constexpr auto venum_v( std::size_t I ) {
return venum_v( std::make_index_sequence<N>{}, I );
}
template<class...Ts>
constexpr auto venum_v( std::variant<Ts...> const& v ) {
return venum_v< sizeof...(Ts) >( v.index() );
}
now you can do this:
using venum = make_venum_t<3>;
venum idx = venum_v(d[0]);
and idx holds the index of the engaged type in d[0]. This is only somewhat useful, as you still need std::visit to use it usefully:
std::visit([&](auto I) {
std::cout << std::get<I>( d[0] );
}, idx );
(within the lambda, I is a std::integral_constant, which can be constexpr converted to an integer.)
but lets you do some interesting things with it.
To extract a value from variant, use std::get:
struct Data
{
...
template <class T>
T& operator[](size_t index)
{
return std::get<T>(m_data[index]);
}
};
However, because this overloaded operator is a template, you can't use simple operator syntax to call it. Use the verbose syntax:
int main()
{
Data d;
d.push_back(0);
d.push_back("string");
d.push_back(3.55);
std::cout << d.operator[]<double>(2);
}
Or rename it to use a plain name instead of the fancy operator[].
Visitor pattern:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <variant>
#include <vector>
template <class ...Ts>
struct MultiVector : std::vector<std::variant<Ts...>> {
template <class Visitor>
void visit(std::size_t i, Visitor&& v) {
std::visit(v, (*this)[i]);
}
};
int main() {
MultiVector<std::string, int, double> vec;
vec.push_back(0);
vec.push_back("string");
vec.push_back(3.55);
vec.visit(2, [](auto& e) { std::cout << e << '\n'; });
}

Setting type of an outer variable using auto lambda parameters

I am using a C++ web framework that heavily uses callback lambda functions. As you may guess, parameters to lambdas are usually specified as auto due to the must to declare very long declarations.
Now I use decltype() operator to find the right type deduced by auto so that I can declare a vector of the same type. When the vector declaration happens inside the lambda, everything is fine.
Where my problem starts is this vector needs to be declared in an outer scope using lambdas auto parameters' type information. Below is a simple example:
std::vector<T> vec; // I want the type information to be inferred just like vec2 from lambda below
auto func = [](auto parameter){
std::vector<decltype(parameter)> vec2; // No problem here.
};
Is this possible?
UPDATE:
The framework I am using is uWebSockets. Here is the example code :
using DataType = std::string;
// I had to go get type information from the source code.
static std::vector<uWS::WebSocket<false, true, DataType> *> users;
uWS::App app {};
app.ws<DataType>("/*", {
.open = [](auto * ws){
// This is also doable
// But not accessible in other lambdas.
static std::vector<decltype(ws)> users2;
// users2.push_back(ws);
users.push_back(ws);
ws->subscribe("sensors/+/house");
},
.close = [](auto *ws, int code, std::string_view message){
users.erase(std::remove(users.begin(), users.end(), ws), users.end());
// Not possible because not accessible.
//users2.erase(std::remove(users2.begin(), users2.end(), ws), users2.end());
std::cout << "Client disconnected!" << std::endl;
},
.message = [](auto *ws, std::string_view message, uWS::OpCode opCode){
try{
std::string message2 = std::string(message) + std::string(" ACK");
for(const auto & ws2 : users)
if(ws != ws2)
ws2->send(message2, opCode);
}catch(std::exception& e){
std::cout << e.what() << std::endl;
}
},
});
Now, nowhere in the main.cpp, there is a need to pass a parameter to lambda functions. That's where the main problem comes from.
The problem here is that auto has no type until it is used, auto make it a template call operator:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
auto func = [](auto param){
std::cout << param << std::endl;
};
func(4); // integer call
func("lol"); //const char* call
return 0;
}
The consequence is that param could have any arbitrary type, before we are looking at a specific usage.
If you know the argument which will be provided, then decltype can be applied:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int arg1 = 4;
using Type1 = decltype(arg1); // type for the argument
auto func = [](auto param){
std::cout << param << std::endl;
};
func(arg1); // Type1 call
func("lol"); //const char* call
return 0;
}
You have to manually look at the type that you are initialising.
A generic lambda creates an object with a template operator(). There's not much stopping there from being multiple instantiations of that template.
If that's the case then there isn't a type that is the type of auto parameter.
You are relatively lucky here, in that the object you are initialising with all these functor members puts the arguments right in it's definition:
MoveOnlyFunction<void(WebSocket<SSL, true, UserData> *)> open = nullptr;
If you don't want to look at the definitions again, you could write a trait
template<typename Signature>
struct MoveOnlyFunctionTraits;
template <typename R, typename... Arguments>
struct MoveOnlyFunctionTraits<MoveOnlyFunctionTraits<R(Arguments...)> {
using result_type = R;
static constexpr auto arity = sizeof...(Arguments);
template <std::size_t I>
using argument = std::tuple_element_t<std::tuple<Arguments...>, I>;
}
template<typename Signature, std::size_t I>
using argument_t = typename MoveOnlyFunctionTraits<Signature>::template argument<I>;
That allows you to pull out the type
using websocket_type = argument_t<decltype(uWS::App::WebSocketBehaviour<DataType>::open), 0>;
std::vector<websocket_type> users;
Or you could submit a pull request to the library, that exposes type aliases you are interested in
template <bool SSL>
struct TemplatedApp {
// existing members ...
public:
template <typename DataType>
using websocket_type = WebSocket<SSL, true, DataType>;
};
Then
std::vector<uWS::App::template websocket_type<DataType> *> users;
Or maybe you could use templates.
#include <vector>
template<typename type_t>
void some_function(const type_t value)
{
std::vector<type_t> vec;
auto func = [](const type_t& parameter)
{
std::vector<type_t> vec2;
};
//....
}
auto get_something()
{
// some made up complex data type returned as auto
using some_complex_data_type_from_somewhere_t = std::vector<std::vector<int>>;
some_complex_data_type_from_somewhere_t value{};
return value;
}
int main()
{
auto value = get_something();
some_function(value);
return 0;
}
You can "front-load" the type inference into a type alias.
void some_function() {
using value_type = decltype(infer_from_somewhere);
// alt: using value_type = typename some::annoyingly<complex>::type;
std::vector<value_type> vec;
auto func = [](value_type parameter){
std::vector<value_type> vec2;
};
//...
}

avoid writing the same repetitive type-checking code with std::any

I want to use std::any in my program but I find myself writing a lot of conditional statements like this:
if (anything.type() == typeid(short)) {
auto s = std::any_cast<short>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(int)) {
auto i = std::any_cast<int>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(long)) {
auto l = std::any_cast<long>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(double)) {
auto d = std::any_cast<double>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(bool)) {
auto b = std::any_cast<bool>(anything);
}
Note that I omitted much of the else if conditions for brevity.
My program can use any of the defined types that can be stored in std::any so these if-then statements are quite long. Is there a way to refactor the code so that I can write it once?
My original inclination was to use templates like so:
template<typename T>
T AnyCastFunction(std::any) {
T type;
if (anything.type() == typeid(short)) {
type = std::any_cast<short>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(int)) {
type = std::any_cast<int>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(long)) {
type = std::any_cast<long>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(double)) {
type = std::any_cast<double>(anything);
} else if (anything.type() == typeid(bool)) {
type = std::any_cast<bool>(anything);
}
return type;
}
However, this leads to "couldn't deduce template parameter T" errors. How can I refactor this to avoid writing the large if/else blocks many times throughout the program?
If you have a known, fixed list of possible types, don't use std::any. Use std::variant<Ts...>. That makes Dietmar's answer look like this:
#include <variant>
void test(std::variant<int, double, char const*> v)
{
std::visit([](auto value){ std::cout << "value=" << value << "\n"; }, v);
}
which is the same thing, except (a) you don't have to implement visit yourself (b) this is massively more efficient at runtime and (c) this is type safe - you can't forget to check a particular type! Really even if you don't care about (a) or (b), (c) is a huge win.
And if you don't have a known, fixed list of possible types - which is the typical use-case for wanting std::any - then anything you're doing with std::any doesn't make sense anyway. You can't enumerate all possible copyable types (there are an infinite amount of them), so you can't necessarily retrieve the contents. So I really think variant is what you want.
Well, if you're sure you need such a broad range stored in any...
template<typename T> void visit(T &&t) { std::cout << "Hi " << t << "!\n"; }
void try_visit(std::any &&) { std::cout << "Unknown type\n"; }
template<typename T, typename... Ts> void try_visit(std::any thing) {
if(thing.type() == typeid(T)) {
visit(std::any_cast<T>(thing));
return;
}
if constexpr(sizeof...(Ts) > 0) try_visit<Ts...>(std::move(thing));
else try_visit(std::move(thing));
}
int main() {
try_visit<short, int, double, bool, long>(std::any{42});
}
%-}
I find this type of code fun to write.
any_visitor<types...> is a function object that visits a set of types.
You invoke it with an any followed by a function object. It then invokes the function object with whichever of the types... is in the any.
So you do any_vistor<int, double>{}( something, [](auto&& x) { /* some code */ } ).
If none of the types... are in the any, it invokes the function object with a std::any for you to deal with the extra case.
We can also write a variant that instead of passing the std::any to the functor, throws or returns false or something.
template<class...Ts>
struct any_visitor;
template<>
struct any_visitor<> {
template<class F>
decltype(auto) operator()( std::any& a, F&& f ) const {
return std::forward<F>(f)(a);
}
};
template<class...Ts>
struct any_visitor {
private:
struct accum {
std::size_t x = 0;
friend accum operator+( accum lhs, accum rhs ) {
if (lhs.x || rhs.x) return {lhs.x+1};
else return {};
}
};
public:
template<class Any, class F>
void operator()(Any&& any, F&& f) const {
// sizeof...(Ts) none in the list
// otherwise, index of which any is in the list
std::size_t which = sizeof...(Ts) - (accum{} + ... + accum{ any.type() == typeid(Ts) }).x;
using table_entry = void(*)(Any&&, F&&);
static const table_entry table[] = {
+[](Any&& any, F&& f) {
std::forward<F>(f)( std::any_cast<Ts>( std::forward<Any>(any) ) );
}...,
+[](Any&& any, F&& f) {
std::forward<F>(f)( std::forward<Any>(any) );
}
};
table[which]( std::forward<Any>(any), std::forward<F>(f) );
}
};
template<class...Fs>
struct overloaded:Fs... {
using Fs::operator()...;
};
template<class...Fs>
overloaded(Fs&&...)->overloaded<std::decay_t<Fs>...>;
I also included overloaded which makes it easier to dispatch. If you want to handle all types uniformly, except handle an error case, you can do:
overloaded{
[](auto const& x){ std::cout << x << "\n"; },
[](std::any const&){ std::cout << "Unknown type\n"; }
}
and pass that as the function object to any_visitor.
Here is some test code:
std::any foo=7;
std::any bar=3.14;
auto visitor = overloaded{
[](int x){std::cout << x << "\n";},
[](auto&&){std::cout << "Unknown\n";}
};
any_visitor<int>{}( foo, visitor );
any_visitor<int>{}( bar, visitor );
which outputs:
7
Unknown
Live example.
Implementation wise, this code uses a dispatch table (sort of like a vtable) to map the index of the type stored in the any to which overload of the function object we invoke.
Yet another approach would be to write:
template<class...Ts>
std::optional<std::variant<Ts...>> to_variant( std::any );
which converts a std::any to a variant if its types match. Then use the usual visiting machinery on std::variant instead of rolling your own.
The basic idea is to create an std::any visitor and do the necessary processing in a function called from the visitor. That basic principle is straight forward. Let's start with supporting just one type:
#include <any>
#include <iostream>
#include <type_traits>
template <typename T, typename Any, typename Visitor>
auto any_visit1(Any&& any, Visitor visit)
-> std::enable_if_t<std::is_same_v<std::any, std::decay_t<Any>>>
{
if (any.type() == typeid(T)) {
visit(std::any_cast<T>(std::forward<Any>(any)));
}
}
int main() {
std::any a0(17);
any_visit1<int>(a0, [](auto value){ std::cout << "value=" << value << "\n"; });
}
The next step is to remove the one type restriction. As the explicit template parameters come first and are an open-ended list and the function object should be a deduced template parameter, you can't quite use a function template. However, a variable template (with an inline constexpr, of course, hence variable...) does the trick:
#include <any>
#include <iostream>
#include <type_traits>
template <typename... T>
inline constexpr auto any_visit =
[](auto&& any, auto visit) -> std::enable_if_t<std::is_same_v<std::any, std::decay_t<decltype(any)>>> {
(
(any.type() == typeid(T) && (visit(std::any_cast<T>(std::forward<decltype(any)>(any))), true))
|| ...)
// Uncomment the line below to have visit(any) called for unhandled types
// || (visit(std::forward<decltype(any)>(any)), true)
;
};
void test(std::any any)
{
any_visit<int, double, char const*>(any, [](auto value){ std::cout << "value=" << value << "\n"; });
}
int main() {
test(17);
test(3.14);
test(+"foo");
}
If you need multiple std::any objects decoded you'd just pass suitable [lambda?] functions into it which refer to the other objects and keep building up the object until you got all the ones you need.

Template to match custom functors or stod, stoi, etc

I'm trying to store key-value parameters as string in a class named ModelConfig. Then I would like to automatically convert these values into specific types, either with custom conversion function or with standard functions stod, stof, stoi, and the like.
My class successfully parses parameters if I provide a custom conversion function, but I can't figure how to also accept standard functions. This is my approach:
class ModelConfig
{
public:
ModelConfig(void) = default;
void addParam(std::string pname, std::string pvalue) {
m_params[pname] = pvalue;
}
template <class F, typename... Args, class T = typename std::result_of<F&&(const std::string&, Args...)>::type>
T getParam(std::string pname, F&& pconv_functor) const
{
return pconv_functor(m_params.at(pname));
}
private:
std::map<std::string, std::string> m_params;
};
The class above, can be tested with:
#include <iostream>
#include <map>
#include <functional>
#include "ModelConfig.hpp"
int main(void)
{
ModelConfig mc;
mc.addParam("p1_float", "123.4");
mc.addParam("p2_double", "56.7");
mc.addParam("p3_bool", "true");
mc.addParam("p4_int", "-321");
auto functord = [](const std::string& s) {
return std::stod(s);
};
std::cout << mc.getParam("p2_double", functord) << "\n"; // OK.
std::cout << mc.getParam("p2_double", std::stod) << "\n"; // Error.
return 0;
}
How can I modify getParam to accept functions where their first argument is a string but which can have others with default values?
std::stod is overloaded, thus the compiler can't deduce which function to use.
You can use macro to write a generic wrapper:
#define wrapper(f) \
( [] (auto&&... args) -> decltype(auto) { \
return f(std::forward<decltype(args)>(args)...); \
} )
Then call it by:
std::cout << mc.getParam("p2_double", wrapper(std::stod)) << "\n";
An alternative and, IMO, better design is to store values as std/boost::variant<bool, long, double, std::string> and convert it to/from string during I/O. This also detects config file errors early on load, rather than on first value access which could happen much later and crash your application in front of the user.
Requiring the user of this API to always pass a conversion function is cumbersome. You can use boost::lexical_cast for converting strings to T:
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <unordered_map>
#include <boost/lexical_cast.hpp>
struct ConvertProxy {
std::string const* value_;
template<class T>
T as() const {
return boost::lexical_cast<T>(*value_);
}
template<class T>
operator T() const {
return this->as<T>();
}
};
class ModelConfig {
std::unordered_map<std::string, std::string> m_params;
public:
void addParam(std::string pname, std::string pvalue) {
m_params[pname] = pvalue;
}
ConvertProxy getParam(std::string pname) const {
return {&m_params.at(pname)};
}
};
int main() {
ModelConfig mc;
mc.addParam("p1_float", "123.4");
mc.addParam("p2_double", "56.7");
mc.addParam("p3_bool", "true");
mc.addParam("p4_int", "-321");
// Example syntax.
double d1 = mc.getParam("p2_double");
auto d2 = mc.getParam("p2_double").as<double>();
auto d3 = static_cast<double>(mc.getParam("p2_double"));
std::cout << mc.getParam("p2_double").as<double>() << "\n";
std::cout << static_cast<double>(mc.getParam("p2_double")) << "\n";
}
The interface of boost::lexical_cast enables an easy solution here. If you cannot use boost::lexical_cast you should probably code up your own with a similar interface.
You can do this with no third party lib and without using preprocessor directives if you need:
by explicitely casting your standard functions pointers. Standard functions are overloaded for string and wstring so the compiler needs our help to determine which one to apply
and by slightly changing your functor's signature to adapt it to the signature of these standard functions as they have a second parameter.
These changes would be slight actually:
In ModelConfig:
class ModelConfig
{
[...]
// Adapted the functor's signature to comply to standard functions' signatures:
template <class F, typename... Args, class T = typename std::result_of<F && (const std::string&, size_t *)>::type>
T getParam(std::string pname, F&& pconv_functor) const
{
return pconv_functor(m_params.at(pname), 0);
}
[...]
};
In main():
int main(void)
{
[...]
// Adapted the functor to standard functions' signature
auto functord = [](const std::string& s, size_t * pos) {
return std::stod(s, pos);
};
// Unchanged, no need
std::cout << mc.getParam("p2_double", functord) << "\n"; // Still OK.
// Cast to determine which overload to use. The typedef helps having things readable.
typedef double(*StandardFunctionSignature)(const std::string&, size_t*);
std::cout << mc.getParam("p2_double", static_cast<StandardFunctionSignature>(std::stod)) << "\n"; // NO Error, it works now.
[...]
}
If you know the signature of the passed in overload set, you can make an additional overload that captures a specific function pointer from that set.
template <class F>
auto getParam(std::string pname, F&& pconv_functor) const
{
return pconv_functor(m_params.at(pname));
}
template <class F>
auto getParam(std::string pname, F(*pconv_functor)(const std::string&, std::size_t*)) const
{
return pconv_functor(m_params.at(pname), 0);
}
This has some obvious limitations, but can be useful in certain situations.

How can implement dynamic function call with C++11 and C++14?

Here is code that I hope explains what I want to achieve.
vector<int> ints;
vector<double> doubles;
struct Arg {
enum Type {
Int,
Double
};
Type type;
int index;
};
template <typename F>
void Call(const F& f, const vector<Arg>& args) {
// TODO:
// - First assert that count and types or arguments of <f> agree with <args>.
// - Call "f(args)"
}
// Example:
void copy(int a, double& b) {
b = a;
}
int test() {
Call(copy, {{Int, 3}, {Double, 2}}); // copy(ints[3], double[2]);
}
Can this be done in C++11 ?
If yes, can the solution be simplified in C++14 ?
I'd do this in two steps.
First, I'd wrap f in an object able to understand Arg-like parameters, and generate errors on failure. For simplicity, suppose we throw.
This is a bit simpler than your Arg to be understood at this layer, so I might translate Arg into MyArg:
struct MyArg {
MyArg(MyArg const&)=default;
MyArg(int* p):i(p){}
MyArg(double* p):d(p){}
MyArg(Arg a):MyArg(
(a.type==Arg::Int)?
MyArg(&ints.at(a.index)):
MyArg(&doubles.at(a.index))
) {}
int * i = nullptr;
double* d = nullptr;
operator int&(){ if (!i) throw std::invalid_argument(""); return *i; }
operator double&(){ if (!d) throw std::invalid_argument(""); return *d; }
};
We map void(*)(Ts...) to std::function<void(MyArg, MyArg, MyArg)> like this:
template<class T0, class T1>using second_type = T1;
template<class...Ts>
std::function<void( second_type<Ts,MyArg>... )> // auto in C++14
my_wrap( void(*f)(Ts...) ) {
return [f](second_type<Ts,MyArg>...args){
f(args...);
};
}
now all that is left is counting function parameter count vs vector size count, and unpacking the std::vector into a function call.
The last looks like:
template<class...Ts, size_t...Is>
void call( std::function<void(Ts...)> f, std::index_sequence<Is...>, std::vector<Arg> const& v ) {
f( v[Is]... );
}
template<class...Ts>
void call( std::function<void(Ts...)> f, std::vector<Arg> const& v ) {
call( std::move(f), std::index_sequence_for<Ts...>{}, v );
}
where index_sequence and index_sequence_for are C++14, but equivalents can be implemented in C++11 (there are many implementations on stack overflow).
So we end up with something like:
template<class...Ts>
void Call( void(*pf)(Ts...), std::vector<Arg> const& v ) {
if (sizeof...(Ts)>v.size())
throw std::invalid_argument("");
auto f = my_wrap(pf);
call( std::move(f), v );
}
Dealing with the throws is left as an exercise, as is handling return values.
This code has not been compiled or tested, but the design should be sound. It only supports calling function pointers -- calling generalized callable objects is tricky, because counting how many arguments they want (of type int or double) is tricky. If you passed in how many arguments they want as a compile-time constant, it is easy. You could also build a magic switch that handles counts up to some constant (10, 20, 1000, whatever), and dispatch the runtime length of the vector into a compile time constant that throws on a argument length mismatch.
This is trickier.
The hard coded pointers sort of suck.
template<class...Ts>struct types{using type=types;};
template<size_t I> using index=std::integral_constant<size_t, I>;
template<class T, class types> struct index_in;
template<class T, class...Ts>
struct index_in<T, types<T,Ts...>>:
index<0>
{};
template<class T, class T0, class...Ts>
struct index_in<T, types<T0,Ts...>>:
index<1+index_in<T, types<Ts...>>{}>
{};
is a package of types.
Here is how we can store buffers:
template<class types>
struct buffers;
template<class...Ts>
struct buffers<types<Ts...>> {
struct raw_view {
void* start = 0;
size_t length = 0;
};
template<class T>
struct view {
T* start = 0;
T* finish = 0;
view(T* s, T* f):start(s), finish(f) {}
size_t size() const { return finish-start; }
T& operator[](size_t i)const{
if (i > size()) throw std::invalid_argument("");
return start[i];
}
}
std::array< raw_view, sizeof...(Ts) > views;
template<size_t I>
using T = std::tuple_element_t< std::tuple<Ts...>, I >;
template<class T>
using I = index_of<T, types<Ts...> >;
template<size_t I>
view<T<I>> get_view() const {
raw_view raw = views[I];
if (raw.length==0) { return {0,0}; }
return { static_cast<T<I>*>(raw.start), raw.length/sizeof(T) };
}
template<class T>
view<T> get_view() const {
return get_view< I<T>{} >();
}
template<class T>
void set_view( view<T> v ) {
raw_view raw{ v.start, v.finish-v.start };
buffers[ I<T>{} ] = raw;
}
};
now we modify Call:
template<class R, class...Args, size_t...Is, class types>
R internal_call( R(*f)(Args...), std::vector<size_t> const& indexes, buffers<types> const& views, std::index_sequence<Is...> ) {
if (sizeof...(Args) != indexes.size()) throw std::invalid_argument("");
return f( views.get_view<Args>()[indexes[Is]]... );
}
template<class R, class...Args, size_t...Is, class types>
R Call( R(*f)(Args...), std::vector<size_t> const& indexes, buffers<types> const& views ) {
return internal_call( f, indexes, views, std::index_sequence_for<Args...>{} );
}
which is C++14, but most components can be translated to C++11.
This uses O(1) array lookups, no maps. You are responsible for populating buffers<types> with the buffers, sort of like this:
buffers<types<double, int>> bufs;
std::vector<double> d = {1.0, 3.14};
std::vector<int> i = {1,2,3};
bufs.set_view<int>( { i.data(), i.data()+i.size() } );
bufs.set_view<double>( { d.data(), d.data()+d.size() } );
parameter mismatch counts and index out of range generate thrown errors. It only works with raw function pointers -- making it work with anything with a fixed (non-template) signature is easy (like a std::function).
Making it work with an object with no signature is harder. Basically instead of relying on the function called for the arguments, you instead build the cross product of the types<Ts...> up to some fixed size. You build a (large) table of which of these are valid calls to the passed in call target (at compile time), then at run time walk that table and determine if the arguments passed in are valid to call the object with.
It gets messy.
This is why my above version simply asks for indexes, and deduces the types from the object being called.
I have a partial solution, using C++11 grammar.
First I make a function overloader accepting arbitrator kinds of arguments
template< typename Function >
struct overloader : Function
{
overloader( Function const& func ) : Function{ func } {}
void operator()(...) const {}
};
template< typename Function >
overloader<Function> make_overloader( Function const& func )
{
return overloader<Function>{ func };
}
then, using the overloader to deceive the compiler into believing the following code ( in switch-case block )is legal:
template <typename F>
void Call( F const& f, const vector<Arg>& args )
{
struct converter
{
Arg const& arg;
operator double&() const
{
assert( arg.type == Double );
return doubles[arg.index];
}
operator int() const
{
assert( arg.type == Int );
return ints[arg.index];
}
converter( Arg const& arg_ ): arg( arg_ ) {}
};
auto function_overloader = make_overloader( f );
unsigned long const arg_length = args.size();
switch (arg_length)
{
case 0 :
function_overloader();
break;
case 1 :
function_overloader( converter{args[0]} );
break;
case 2 :
function_overloader( converter{args[0]}, converter{args[1]} );
break;
case 3 :
function_overloader( converter{args[0]}, converter{args[1]}, converter{args[2]} );
break;
/*
case 4 :
.
.
.
case 127 :
*/
}
}
and test it this way:
void test_1()
{
Call( []( int a, double& b ){ b = a; }, vector<Arg>{ Arg{Int, 3}, Arg{Double, 2} } );
}
void test_2()
{
Call( []( double& b ){ b = 3.14; }, vector<Arg>{ Arg{Double, 0} } );
}
void my_copy( int a, double& b, double& c )
{
b = a;
c = a+a;
}
void test_3()
{
//Call( my_copy, vector<Arg>{ Arg{Int, 4}, Arg{Double, 3}, Arg{Double, 1} } ); // -- this one does not work
Call( []( int a, double& b, double& c ){ my_copy(a, b, c); }, vector<Arg>{ Arg{Int, 4}, Arg{Double, 3}, Arg{Double, 1} } );
}
the problems with this solution is:
g++5.2 accept it, clang++6.1 doesn's
when the argument(s) of function Call is/are not legal, it remains silent
the first argument of function Call cannot be a C-style function, one must wrap that into a lambda object to make it work.
the code is available here - http://melpon.org/wandbox/permlink/CHZxVfLM92h1LACf -- for you to play with.
First of all, you need some mechanism to register your argument values that are later referenced by some type and an index:
class argument_registry
{
public:
// register a range of arguments of type T
template <class T, class Iterator>
void register_range(Iterator begin, Iterator end)
{
// enclose the range in a argument_range object and put it in our map
m_registry.emplace(typeid(T), std::make_unique<argument_range<T, Iterator>>(begin, end));
}
template <class T>
const T& get_argument(size_t idx) const
{
// check if we have a registered range for this type
auto itr = m_registry.find(typeid(T));
if (itr == m_registry.end())
{
throw std::invalid_argument("no arguments registered for this type");
}
// we are certain about the type, so downcast the argument_range object and query the argument
auto range = static_cast<const argument_range_base1<T>*>(itr->second.get());
return range->get(idx);
}
private:
// base class so we can delete the range objects properly
struct argument_range_base0
{
virtual ~argument_range_base0(){};
};
// interface for querying arguments
template <class T>
struct argument_range_base1 : argument_range_base0
{
virtual const T& get(size_t idx) const = 0;
};
// implements get by querying a registered range of arguments
template <class T, class Iterator>
struct argument_range : argument_range_base1<T>
{
argument_range(Iterator begin, Iterator end)
: m_begin{ begin }, m_count{ size_t(std::distance(begin, end)) } {}
const T& get(size_t idx) const override
{
if (idx >= m_count)
throw std::invalid_argument("argument index out of bounds");
auto it = m_begin;
std::advance(it, idx);
return *it;
}
Iterator m_begin;
size_t m_count;
};
std::map<std::type_index, std::unique_ptr<argument_range_base0>> m_registry;
};
Than we define a small type to combine a type and a numerical index for referencing arguments:
typedef std::pair<std::type_index, size_t> argument_index;
// helper function for creating an argument_index
template <class T>
argument_index arg(size_t idx)
{
return{ typeid(T), idx };
}
Finally, we need some template recursion to go through all expected arguments of a function, check if the user passed an argument of matching type and query it from the registry:
// helper trait for call function; called when there are unhandled arguments left
template <bool Done>
struct call_helper
{
template <class FuncRet, class ArgTuple, size_t N, class F, class... ExpandedArgs>
static FuncRet call(F func, const argument_registry& registry, const std::vector<argument_index>& args, ExpandedArgs&&... expanded_args)
{
// check if there are any arguments left in the passed vector
if (N == args.size())
{
throw std::invalid_argument("not enough arguments");
}
// get the type of the Nth argument
typedef typename std::tuple_element<N, ArgTuple>::type arg_type;
// check if the type matches the argument_index from our vector
if (std::type_index{ typeid(arg_type) } != args[N].first)
{
throw std::invalid_argument("argument of wrong type");
}
// query the argument from the registry
auto& arg = registry.get_argument<arg_type>(args[N].second);
// add the argument to the ExpandedArgs pack and continue the recursion with the next argument N + 1
return call_helper<std::tuple_size<ArgTuple>::value == N + 1>::template call<FuncRet, ArgTuple, N + 1>(func, registry, args, std::forward<ExpandedArgs>(expanded_args)..., arg);
}
};
// helper trait for call function; called when there are no arguments left
template <>
struct call_helper<true>
{
template <class FuncRet, class ArgTuple, size_t N, class F, class... ExpandedArgs>
static FuncRet call(F func, const argument_registry&, const std::vector<argument_index>& args, ExpandedArgs&&... expanded_args)
{
if (N != args.size())
{
// unexpected arguments in the vector
throw std::invalid_argument("too many arguments");
}
// call the function with all the expanded arguments
return func(std::forward<ExpandedArgs>(expanded_args)...);
}
};
// call function can only work on "real", plain functions
// as you could never do dynamic overload resolution in C++
template <class Ret, class... Args>
Ret call(Ret(*func)(Args...), const argument_registry& registry, const std::vector<argument_index>& args)
{
// put the argument types into a tuple for easier handling
typedef std::tuple<Args...> arg_tuple;
// start the call_helper recursion
return call_helper<sizeof...(Args) == 0>::template call<Ret, arg_tuple, 0>(func, registry, args);
}
Now you can use it like this:
int foo(int i, const double& d, const char* str)
{
printf("called foo with %d, %f, %s", i, d, str);
// return something
return 0;
}
int main()
{
// prepare some arguments
std::vector<int> ints = { 1, 2, 3 };
std::vector<double> doubles = { 10., 20., 30. };
std::vector<const char*> str = { "alpha", "bravo", "charlie" };
// register them
argument_registry registry;
registry.register_range<int>(ints.begin(), ints.end());
registry.register_range<double>(doubles.begin(), doubles.end());
registry.register_range<const char*>(str.begin(), str.end());
// call function foo with arguments from the registry
return call(foo, registry, {arg<int>(2), arg<double>(0), arg<const char*>(1)});
}
Live example: http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/7350319f88d86c53
This design should be open for any argument type without the need to list all the supported types somewhere.
As noted in the code comments, you cannot call any callable object like this in general, because overload resolution could never be done at runtime in C++.
Instead of clarifying the question, as I requested, you have put it up for bounty. Except if that really is the question, i.e. a homework assignment with no use case, just exercising you on general basic programming, except for that only sheer luck will then give you an answer to your real question: people have to guess about what the problem to be solved, is. That's the reason why nobody's bothered, even with the bounty, to present a solution to the when-obvious-errors-are-corrected exceedingly trivial question that you literally pose, namely how to do exactly this:
vector<int> ints;
vector<double> doubles;
struct Arg {
enum Type {
Int,
Double
};
Type type;
int index;
};
template <typename F>
void Call(const F& f, const vector<Arg>& args) {
// TODO:
// - First assert that count and types or arguments of <f> agree with <args>.
// - Call "f(args)"
}
// Example:
void copy(int a, double& b) {
b = a;
}
int test() {
Call(copy, {{Int, 3}, {Double, 2}}); // copy(ints[3], double[2]);
}
In C++11 and later one very direct way is this:
#include <assert.h>
#include <vector>
using std::vector;
namespace g {
vector<int> ints;
vector<double> doubles;
}
struct Arg {
enum Type {
Int,
Double
};
Type type;
int index;
};
template <typename F>
void Call(const F& f, const vector<Arg>& args)
{
// Was TODO:
// - First assert that count and types or arguments of <f> agree with <args>.
assert( args.size() == 2 );
assert( args[0].type == Arg::Int );
assert( int( g::ints.size() ) > args[0].index );
assert( args[1].type == Arg::Double );
assert( int( g::doubles.size() ) > args[1].index );
// - Call "f(args)"
f( g::ints[args[0].index], g::doubles[args[1].index] );
}
// Example:
void copy(int a, double& b)
{
b = a;
}
auto test()
{
Call(copy, {{Arg::Int, 3}, {Arg::Double, 2}}); // copy(ints[3], double[2]);
}
namespace h {}
auto main()
-> int
{
g::ints = {000, 100, 200, 300};
g::doubles = {1.62, 2.72, 3.14};
test();
assert( g::doubles[2] == 300 );
}
There are no particularly relevant new features in C++14.
I propose this answer following my comment on your question. Seeing that in the requirements, you stated:
Preferably we should not be required to create a struct that
enumerates all the types we want to support.
It could suggests you would like to get rid of the type enumerator in your Arg structure. Then, only the value would be left: then why not using plain C++ types directly, instead of wrapping them ?
It assumes you then know all your argument types at compile time
(This assumption could be very wrong, but I did not see any requirement in your question preventing it. I would be glad to rewrite my answer if you give more details).
The C++11 variadic template solution
Now to the solution, using C++11 variadic templates and perfect forwarding. In a file Call.h:
template <class F, class... T_Args>
void Call(F f, T_Args &&... args)
{
f(std::forward<T_Args>(args)...);
}
Solution properties
This approach seems to satisfy all your explicit requirements:
Works with C++11 standard
Checks that count and types or arguments of f agress with args.
It actually does that early, at compile time, instead of a possible runtime approach.
No need to manually enumerate the accepted types (actually works with any C++ type, be it native or user defined)
Not in your requirement, but nice to have:
Very compact, because it leverage a native features introduced in C++11.
Accepts any number of arguments
The type of the argument and the type of the corresponding f parameter do not have to match exactly, but have to be compatible (exactly like a plain C++ function call).
Example usage
You could test it in a simple main.cpp file:
#include "Call.h"
#include <iostream>
void copy(int a, double& b)
{
b = a;
}
void main()
{
int a = 5;
double b = 6.2;
std::cout << "b before: " << b << std::endl;
Call(copy, a, b);
std::cout << "b now: " << b << std::endl;
}
Which would print:
b before: 6.2
b now: 5