Use constructor parameters outside constructor in constexpr class - c++

I am trying to implement matrix-like class, using an std::array to actually store the data. All of the data is known at compile-time.
I want to be able to use initializer-lists to initialize the Matrix. Something along the lines of
Matrix m = {
{1, 2, 3},
{4, 5, 6},
{7, 8, 9}
};
I also want to be able to set the dimensions of my matrix during instantiation.
My current code is similar to the following:
template<int m, int n>
class Matrix {
public:
using initializer_list2d = std::initializer_list< std::initializer_list<float> >;
using array2d = std::array< std::array<float, m>, n >;
consteval Matrix(initializer_list2d initList) {
// static_assert to check initList length [...]
int i = 0;
for (auto &row : initList) {
// static_assert to check row length [...]
std::copy(row.begin(), row.end(), data_[i].begin());
i++;
}
}
// Definitions of operators and methods [...]
private:
array2d data_;
};
In order to use this though, I have to set the dimensions through the template:
Matrix<3, 3> m = {
{1, 2, 3},
{4, 5, 6},
{7, 8, 9}
};
It seems to me, that since the constructor is consteval (and all of its parameters have to be known at compile-time anyway) it should somehow bet possible to deduce the dimensions through the initializer-list alone.
Using a dynamic data type (e.g. vector) is not possible for my application, since this program has to be able to run without access to the heap.
Is there some way to achieve this?
Thanks for any help in advance!

Before C++17 there is no deduction of template arguments for a class template, so this is not possible.
From C++17, you can write this deduction guide:
template<int m, int n>
Matrix(float const (&)[n][m]) -> Matrix<m, n>;
and add an extra pair of braces when constructing the Matrix:
Matrix m =
{
{
{1, 2, 3},
{4, 5, 6},
{7, 8, 9}
}
};
Here's a demo.

I found another interesting solution, using variadic templates:
template<int m, class T, class... U>
struct Matrix {
Matrix(const T (&t)[m], const U (& ...u)[m]) {
std::copy(t, t+m, arr[0]);
int i = 0;
(std::copy(u, u+m, arr[++i]), ...);
}
T (arr[m])[sizeof...(U) + 1];
};
It even allows for getting rid of the second brace required in cigien's answer and doesn't need a template deduction guide (Although it still needs C++17 in order for int m to be automatically deduced):
Matrix mat = {
{1, 2, 3},
{4, 5, 6},
{7, 8, 9}
};
Also, the compiler seems to be able to optimze this quite a bit, as seen here

Related

How does recursion work while defining multidimensional template arrays?

This is the code I found online.
template<class T, unsigned ... RestD> struct array;
template<class T, unsigned PrimaryD >
struct array<T, PrimaryD>
{
typedef T type[PrimaryD];
type data;
T& operator[](unsigned i) { return data[i]; }
};
template<class T, unsigned PrimaryD, unsigned ... RestD >
struct array<T, PrimaryD, RestD...>
{
typedef typename array<T, RestD...>::type OneDimensionDownArrayT;
typedef OneDimensionDownArrayT type[PrimaryD];
type data;
OneDimensionDownArrayT& operator[](unsigned i) { return data[i]; }
};
int main()
{
array<int, 2, 3>::type a4 = { { 1, 2, 3}, { 1, 2, 3} };
array<int, 2, 3> a5{ { { 1, 2, 3}, { 4, 5, 6} } };
std::cout << a5[1][2] << std::endl;
array<int, 3> a6{ {1, 2, 3} };
std::cout << a6[1] << std::endl;
array<int, 1, 2, 3> a7{ { { { 1, 2, 3}, { 4, 5, 6 } } }};
std::cout << a7[0][1][2] << std::endl;
}
Could you explain what this code does exactly? I understand that recursion is used in some form here to create a multidimensional array, but I am a little confused on how this process works.
I am also confused about this line:
array<int, 2, 3>::type a4 = { { 1, 2, 3}, { 1, 2, 3} };
What is the ::type?
This is whats called template specialization.
The first thing you must know is that anything defined with template is evaluated at compile time.
Looking at your code, there are two main cases we want to consider:
When the array is of one-dimension
When the array has more than one dimension
The following describes the one-dimensional case:
template<class T, unsigned PrimaryD >
struct array<T, PrimaryD>
{
typedef T type[PrimaryD];
type data;
T& operator[](unsigned i) { return data[i]; }
};
As you can see the above struct is specialized to only accept two template parameters, the first one is T the data type of the array, and the second is PrimaryD which simply means how long should the array be.
Now for the 2nd specialization:
template<class T, unsigned PrimaryD, unsigned ... RestD >
struct array<T, PrimaryD, RestD...>
{
// if the template contains array<int, 1, 2, 3, 4>
// then RestD... will unpack the values 2, 3, 4
typedef typename array<T, RestD...>::type
OneDimensionDownArrayT;
typedef OneDimensionDownArrayT type[PrimaryD];
type data;
// This will return an array type
// you can keep on making a call to operator[] until the type of the OneDimensionDownArrayT refers to the previous specialization
OneDimensionDownArrayT& operator[](unsigned i) { return
data[i];
}
};
Now for your example:
array<int, 2, 3>::type a4 = { { 1, 2, 3}, { 1, 2, 3} }
What the compiler will do is sort of match the template parameters namely, int, 2, and 3 which evaluate to the 2nd specialization.
Let's follow it through:
array<int, 2, 3> which is a struct contains the following concrete types:
OneDimensionalT which is equal to array<int, 3>
and an operator[] function that returns an array<int, 3>.
OneDimensionalT is equal to array<int, 3> because if you unpack the RestD... values you will only get 3, the 2 is already consumed by the first template parameter, PrimaryD.
Adding a 3rd dimension follows the same logic, keep on defining smaller dimension struct array types recursively using only the n-1 dimension values of the parameter pack RestD...
Oh and btw, the line on the top is just to declare the base type so we can specialize it.

How to use template to generate a regular argument list and pass it to run time functions?

For example, I want to generate a reverse ordered array, but the codes are really redundant.
The constructor is on run-time but the array size is on compile time. However, these codes are very similar.
#include <array>
#include <cstdint>
using std::array;
array<int32_t, 5> genReverse5() {
array<int32_t, 5> a{5, 4, 3, 2, 1};
return a;
}
array<int32_t, 4> genReverse4() {
array<int32_t, 4> a{ 4, 3, 2, 1};
return a;
}
array<int32_t, 3> genReverse3() {
array<int32_t, 3> a{ 3, 2, 1};
return a;
}
You can try with std::integer_sequence (since C++14).
template <std::size_t... I>
auto genReverse_impl(std::index_sequence<I...>) {
array<int32_t, sizeof...(I)> a{ (sizeof...(I) - I)... }; // decrease progressively
return a;
}
template<std::size_t N, typename Indices = std::make_index_sequence<N>>
auto genReverse()
{
return genReverse_impl(Indices{});
}
then use it as
genReverse<5>(); // returns array initialized as {5, 4, 3, 2, 1}
genReverse<4>(); // returns array initialized as {4, 3, 2, 1}
genReverse<3>(); // returns array initialized as {3, 2, 1}
LIVE

std::array class member set during compile time?

I have a class with private member std::array<int,10> m_arr; which contains zeros by default, but in one case it must be set to something else.
There is a setter for that class
void setArray(const std::array<int,10>& arr)
{
m_arr=arr;
}
However I was wondering if the setting can be done compile time somehow for that specific case?
Thanks in advance.
A possible solution can be the following one:
#include<utility>
#include<array>
struct S {
constexpr S(): arr{} { }
template<std::size_t... I>
constexpr S(std::integer_sequence<std::size_t, I...>): arr{ I... } { }
std::array<std::size_t, 10> arr;
};
int main() {
constexpr S s1{};
constexpr S s2{std::integer_sequence<std::size_t, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1>{}};
// equivalent to: constexpr S s3{std::integer_sequence<std::size_t, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9>{}};
constexpr S s3{std::make_index_sequence<10>{}};
}
Note that integer_sequence is part of the C++14 revision.
Anyway, you can find online an implementation of such a structure that is suitable for C++11 based projects.

Ambiguous constructor call (I assume)

I have a matrix class defined like so:
template <typename T, unsigned int N, unsigned int M>
class TMatrixNxM //Rows x columns
{
public:
TMatrixNxM(T = T(0)); //Default constructor
TMatrixNxM(const std::array<std::array<T, M>, N>&); //Construct from array
TMatrixNxM(std::initializer_list<std::initializer_list<T>>); //Initializer
//...
private:
std::array<std::array<T, M>, N> data; //ROW-MAJOR
};
Now, in the code which uses matrices I have:
Math::Matrix3x3 b({{1, 2, 3}, {4, 5, 6}, {7, 8, 9}});
(Note: Matrix3x3 is a typedef for TMatrixNxM< float, 3, 3> and also, it is in a Math namespace)
Until now, it worked, because I didn't always have that array constructor, only initializer list one. But now, however, the compiler doesn't even finish compiling, it crashes! (I get "stopped working" popup and I have to close it, I am using MS VS Express 2013)
If I do it like this:
Math::Matrix3x3 b = {{1, 2, 3}, {4, 5, 6}, {7, 8, 9}};
Then it works fine. This is what I assume:
When I do it like that, then there is no ambiguity since you can only call the initializer_list constructor that way. With the first approach the compiler may be confused, since array is an aggregate type which means the initialization starts with double braces like: {{...}}, but also since I have an initializer list of initializer lists I have to use double braces. But should it really be a problem, since I never actually do double braces, those are single-braced lists inside a larger single-braces list?
What is really happening here and how do I solve this problem?
Thank you for your time!
EDIT
Compiler doesn't crash anymore if I make the constructor take the array by const pointer (since I'm never really going to straight-out plop the array in the constructor call, I have initializer list for that):
TMatrixNxM(const std::array<std::array<T, M>, N>*);
However can someone explain what was an actual problem before, was my assumption right?
Here's a minimal compilable (or, well, not) code that you can use to test:
#include <array>
#include <initializer_list>
template <typename T, unsigned int N, unsigned int M>
class TMatrixNxM //Rows x columns
{
public:
TMatrixNxM(T = T(0));
TMatrixNxM(const std::array<std::array<T, M>, N>&);
TMatrixNxM(std::initializer_list<std::initializer_list<T>>);
private:
std::array<std::array<T, M>, N> data; //ROW-MAJOR
};
template <typename T, unsigned int N, unsigned int M>
TMatrixNxM<T, N, M>::TMatrixNxM(T par_value)
{
std::array<T, M> temp;
temp.fill(par_value);
data.fill(temp);
}
template <typename T, unsigned int N, unsigned int M>
TMatrixNxM<T, N, M>::TMatrixNxM(const std::array<std::array<T, M>, N> &par_values)
{
data = par_values;
}
template <typename T, unsigned int N, unsigned int M>
TMatrixNxM<T, N, M>::TMatrixNxM(std::initializer_list<std::initializer_list<T>> par_values)
{
int i = 0;
for(std::initializer_list<T> row : par_values)
{
int j = 0;
for(T value : row)
{
data[i][j] = value;
++j;
}
++i;
}
}
int main()
{
TMatrixNxM<float, 3, 3> b({{1, 2, 3}, {4, 5, 6}, {7, 8, 9}});
return 0;
}
If you comment out the constructor declaration/definition with arrays then it should compile and execute fine. As stated previously, I am using compiler from MS VS Express 2013.
Well, looks like it just doesn't work on Microsoft's compiler. I tried to compile the same code on my Linux machine that uses GCC and it compiles with no problems. And it is indeed calling the initializer list constructor as it should. If I make an array in a variable and pass it, it also compiles fine, and it calls the array constructor:
std::array<float, 3> a = {{1, 2, 3}};
std::array<std::array<float, 3>, 3> b = {{a, a, a}};
TMatrixNxM<float, 3, 3> mat(b);
It also compiles and calls the array constructor if I initialize the array directly:
TMatrixNxM<float, 3, 3> mat({{ {{1, 2, 3}}, {{4, 5, 6}}, {{7, 8, 9}} }});

Initializer-list for initializing 2D std::array member

How to initialize a nested (2D) std::array via an initializer-list?
template <std::size_t W, std::size_t H>
class Block
{
std::array<std::array<int, W>, H> block;
public:
template <typename ...E>
Block(E&&...e) : block {{std::forward<E>(e)...}} {}
};
The class Block should able to initialize block member as below:
Block<3, 2> b {{ {1, 2, 3}, {4, 5, 6} }};
Note: We have the ability to initialize the std::array directly in C++11:
std::array<std::array<int, 3>, 2> b {{ {1, 2, 3}, {4, 5, 6} }};
I'm using gcc-4.9.0
The rules for braces are very complicated when it comes to nested structures.
The simplest form in your code would be this:
Block<3, 2> b {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6};
That basically omits all the inner braces — these omissions are allowed by the language.
The next syntax, which is slightly complex, is this:
Block<3, 2> b {{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}};
It still omits braces, but as far as Block and as its member is concerned it is FULLY braced. It omits braces for the array and its members.
And this one is FULLY braced:
Block<3, 2> b {{{ {{1, 2,3}}, {{4,5,6}} }}};
It braces for all inner structures.
All forms compiles fine.
See my other answer for detailed explanation:
When can outer braces be omitted in an initializer list?
It may be to do with the interpretation of the standard being overly capricious with the number of braces required to initialize std::array. This fully braced version compiles without issues on GCC 4.8.1:
Block<3, 2> b {
{
{
{ {1, 2, 3} }, { {4, 5, 6} }
}
}
};
Strangely, this version compiles too:
Block<3, 2> b {
{{ {1, 2, 3}, {4, 5, 6} } }
};