C++: confusing variadic template causing "candidate function not viable" error - c++

I was trying to port a CUDA project into ROCm platform which make use of C++ templates extensively. During this process, I am getting following compilation error
/root/warp-ctc/include/detail/gpu_ctc.h:381:5: error: no matching function for call to 'hipLaunchKernelGGL'
hipLaunchKernelGGL((prepare_stable_SM_kernel<ProbT, VT>), dim3(grid_size), dim3(NT), 0, stream_, ctc_helper::identity<ProbT>(), probs_,
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.....
.....
/opt/rocm/hip/include/hip/hcc_detail/functional_grid_launch.hpp:138:13: note: candidate function [with Args = <ctc_helper::identity<float, float>, float *,
float *, int, int>, F = void (*)(ctc_helper::identity<float, float>, float *, float *, int, int)] not viable: no overload of 'prepare_stable_SM_kernel'
matching 'void (*)(ctc_helper::identity<float, float>, float *, float *, int, int)' for 1st argument
inline void hipLaunchKernelGGL(F kernel, const dim3& numBlocks, const dim3& dimBlocks,
for following piece of C++ code
hipLaunchKernelGGL((prepare_stable_SM_kernel<ProbT, VT>),
dim3(grid_size),
dim3(NT),
0,
stream_,
ctc_helper::identity<ProbT>(),
probs_,
denoms_,
out_dim_,
num_elements);
where hipLaunchKernelGGL is defined as
template <typename... Args, typename F = void (*)(Args...)>
inline void hipLaunchKernelGGL(F kernel,
const dim3& numBlocks,
const dim3& dimBlocks,
std::uint32_t sharedMemBytes,
hipStream_t stream,
Args... args) {
// ...
// ...
}
and prepare_stable_SM_kernel is defined as
template <typename ProbT, int VT = 1, typename Op>
__global__ void prepare_stable_SM_kernel(Op f, ProbT* probs,
const ProbT* const col_max,
int alphabet_size,
int count) {
// ...
}
Anyone please help me by providing some hints to fix this problem.

This error was fixed by adding a third parameter ctc_helper::identity<ProbT> to prepare_stable_SM_kernel function
Ref https://github.com/harish2704/warp-ctc/commit/c7ec45febc9c0077ffa35932b3d11a05daf8bf7c#diff-1e372cfc8edab301b6c284e9db8dbf68

Related

Why does my variadic template instantiation not work?

I am revisiting C++ after a long hiatus, and I would like to use templates to design the known "map" function -- the one which applies a function to every element of a collection.
Disregarding the fact my map doesn't return anything (a non-factor here), I have managed to implement what I wanted if the function passed to "map" does not need to accept additional arguments:
#include <iostream>
template <typename C, void fn(const typename C::value_type &)> void map(const C & c) {
for(auto i : c) {
fn(i);
}
}
struct some_container_type { /// Just some hastily put together iterable structure type
typedef int value_type;
value_type * a;
int n;
some_container_type(value_type * a, int n): a(a), n(n) { }
value_type * begin() const {
return a;
}
value_type * end() const {
return a + n;
}
};
void some_fn(const int & e) { /// A function used for testing the "map" function
std::cout << "`fn` called for " << e << std::endl;
}
int main() {
int a[] = { 5, 7, 12 };
const some_container_type sc(a, std::size(a));
map<some_container_type, some_fn>(sc);
}
However, I would like map to accept additional arguments to call fn with. I've tried to compile the modified variant of the program (container type definition was unchanged):
template <typename C, typename ... T, void fn(const typename C::value_type &, T ...)> void map(const C & c, T ... args) {
for(auto i : c) {
fn(i, args...);
}
}
void some_fn(const int & e, int a, float b, char c) {
std::cout << "`fn` called for " << e << std::endl;
}
int main() {
int a[] = { 5, 7, 12 };
const some_container_type sc(a, std::size(a));
map<some_container_type, int, float, char, some_fn>(sc, 1, 2.0f, '3');
}
But gcc -std=c++20 refuses to compile the modified program containing the above variant, aborting with:
<source>: In function 'int main()':
<source>:29:56: error: no matching function for call to 'map<some_container_type, int, float, char, some_fn>(const some_container_type&, int, int, int)'
29 | map<some_container_type, int, float, char, some_fn>(sc, 1, 2, 3);
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~
<source>:16:97: note: candidate: 'template<class C, class ... T, void (* fn)(const typename C::value_type&, T ...)> void map(const C&, T ...)'
16 | template <typename C, typename ... T, void fn(const typename C::value_type &, T ... args)> void map(const C & c, T ... args) {
| ^~~
<source>:16:97: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed:
<source>:29:56: error: type/value mismatch at argument 2 in template parameter list for 'template<class C, class ... T, void (* fn)(const typename C::value_type&, T ...)> void map(const C&, T ...)'
29 | map<some_container_type, int, float, char, some_fn>(sc, 1, 2, 3);
| ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~
<source>:29:56: note: expected a type, got 'some_fn'
Microsoft Visual C++ compiler (19.24.28314) gives a more descriptive error message:
error C3547: template parameter 'fn' cannot be used because it follows a template parameter pack and cannot be deduced from the function parameters of 'map'
Can someone explain if and how I can idiomatically accomplish for map to accept arbitrary arguments for forwarding these to fn?
I know I can pass fn to the map function as argument instead of specifying it as an argument to the template, but for reasons related to inlining and to better understand C++ templates, I'd like to retain fn a template rather than a function parameter.
I also don't want to use any libraries, including the standard library (what use of std I show in the examples above is only for clarifying the question). I know there are "functor" and "forward" somewhere in the libraries, but I suppose they too were written in C++, so I am curious if my problem can be solved without any libraries.
A simple way to fix this would be to deduce the non-type template parameter for the function, and reorder the template parameter list
template <typename C, auto fn, typename ... T>
void map(const C & c, T ... args) {
for(auto i : c) {
fn(i, args...);
}
}
and then call it like this
map<some_container_type, some_fn, int, float, char>(sc, 1, 2.0f, '3');
Here's a demo
You could also move fn to the beginning of the template parameter list.
template <auto fn, typename C, typename ... T>
void map(const C & c, T ... args) {
for(auto i : c) {
fn(i, args...);
}
}
Now since C and T can be deduced from the function arguments, this makes the call site much cleaner
map<some_fn>(sc, 1, 2.0f, '3');
Here's a demo

g++ fails to resolve template function overload

With the following code g++ fails:
template <typename X = int, typename T, typename ...R>
inline void func(const T&, R...) {}
template <typename T>
struct S {};
template <typename X = int, typename T, typename ...R>
inline void func(const S<T>&, R...) {}
int main() {
func(42);
func(S<int>()); // OK
func(S<int>(), 1); // NOK
func<int>(S<int>(), 1); // NOK
}
with:
<source>: In function 'int main()':
<source>:13:21: error: call of overloaded 'func(S<int>, int)' is ambiguous
func(S<int>(), 1); // NOK
^
<source>:13:21: note: candidates are:
<source>:2:17: note: void func(const T&, R ...) [with X = int; T = S<int>; R = {int}]
inline void func(const T&, R...) {}
^
<source>:8:17: note: void func(const S<T>&, R ...) [with X = int; T = int; R = {int}]
inline void func(const S<T>&, R...) {}
^
<source>:14:26: error: call of overloaded 'func(S<int>, int)' is ambiguous
func<int>(S<int>(), 1); // NOK
^
...
Reproducible with gcc v4.8.1 and v9.1. Compiles with clang (v3.0.0 and v8.0.0), icc (v13.0.1 and v19.0.1), msvc (v19.14 and v19.20).
Is the code valid or is this a bug in gcc?
EDIT: Thanks everyone, your feedback was helpful for me. FYI, bug 90642 has been filed; looking forward for a definite answer.
Interesting question. I think what you run into here is overload resolution, more specifically partial ordering rules for template specialization
I quote:
Informally "A is more specialized than B" means "A accepts fewer types than B".
I think the clang is correct to compile that and the resulution should take the second candiate
template <typename X = int, typename T, typename ...R>
inline void func(const S<T>& t, R... p) {}
Because in case the first argument is not of type S<T>, it is no longer viable and thus more specialized.

How to create a C-style callback with a C++ static class method

Most examples don't clearly show how to create a std::function with a static class method that takes an object instance as the first parameter.
I would like to take a static class method that takes an object instance as the first parameter and create a new function that can be used as a C-style callback function and has access to an object instance.
I seem to have tried everything. I took the example here and tried to refactor it to my use case with no luck by using a similar examples here.
See more up-to-date example below
#include <functional>
#include <iostream>
struct Foo
{
Foo(int me) : m_me(me) {}
static int foo_static(Foo* f, int a, int b) { return f->m_me + a + b; }
int m_me;
};
int main()
{
Foo f(4);
using std::placeholders::_1;
std::function<int(int,int)> new_func = std::bind(&Foo::foo_static, &f, _1);
std::cout << new_func(3, 4) << std::endl;
}
EDIT
Forgot compiler output
$ c++ main.cpp -std=c++14
main.cpp:25:30: error: no viable conversion from '__bind<int (*)(Foo *, int, int), Foo *, const std::__1::placeholders::__ph<1> &>' to
'std::function<int (int, int)>'
std::function<int(int,int)> new_funct = std::bind(&Foo::foo_static, &f, _1);
^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/include/c++/v1/functional:1627:5: note: candidate constructor not
viable: no known conversion from '__bind<int (*)(Foo *, int, int), Foo *, const std::__1::placeholders::__ph<1> &>' to 'std::nullptr_t'
(aka 'nullptr_t') for 1st argument
function(nullptr_t) _NOEXCEPT : __f_(0) {}
^
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/include/c++/v1/functional:1628:5: note: candidate constructor not
viable: no known conversion from '__bind<int (*)(Foo *, int, int), Foo *, const std::__1::placeholders::__ph<1> &>' to
'const std::__1::function<int (int, int)> &' for 1st argument
function(const function&);
^
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/include/c++/v1/functional:1629:5: note: candidate constructor not
viable: no known conversion from '__bind<int (*)(Foo *, int, int), Foo *, const std::__1::placeholders::__ph<1> &>' to
'std::__1::function<int (int, int)> &&' for 1st argument
function(function&&) _NOEXCEPT;
^
/Applications/Xcode.app/Contents/Developer/Toolchains/XcodeDefault.xctoolchain/usr/include/c++/v1/functional:1631:5: note: candidate template
ignored: requirement '__callable<__bind<int (*)(Foo *, int, int), Foo *, const __ph<1> &> >::value' was not satisfied [with _Fp =
std::__1::__bind<int (*)(Foo *, int, int), Foo *, const std::__1::placeholders::__ph<1> &>]
function(_Fp);
^
1 error generated.
Here's a bit more detail on what I'm trying to accomplish. The m_callback is what I'm trying to setup. I could push what I need in the callback into the ClientData but I like the Command structure to hold on to it's data and not have to create a new structure to pass as the ClientData per command.
#include <functional>
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
typedef void (* callback) (Client* client, ClientData* client_data);
struct Command
{
int execute() = 0;
}
struct Search : Command
{
enum SearchType { kType1, kType2 };
Search(Logger log, std::string query, SearchType type) : m_log(log), m_callback(), m_query(query), m_typ(type)
{
m_callback = // create callback
}
int execute(Client* client, ClientData* client_data)
{
client->query(client_data, m_callback, m_query, m_type);
}
static int my_callback(Foo* f, Client* client, ClientData* client_data);
Logger& m_log;
callback m_callback;
std::string m_query;
SearchType m_type;
// other data I want in the callback that isn't passed in client_data
};
int main()
{
Logger log;
Search search(log, "some search", Search::kType1);
Client client;
ClientData client_data;
search.execute(&client, client_data);
}
So I figured out what I was doing wrong with the std::bind but now I need to convert that to the C-style callback I need to work with.
The bind function has something wrong, you have used _1 only however you need to pass 2 arguments.
Change this:
using std::placeholders::_1;
std::function<int(int,int)> new_func = std::bind(&Foo::foo_static, &f, _1);
To
using std::placeholders::_1;
using std::placeholders::_2;
std::function<int(int,int)> new_func = std::bind(&Foo::foo_static, &f, _1,_2);

C++17 Cannot use std::bind to produce a std::function

I have a Register function which takes a std::function<void(const uint8_t* data, size_t len)> as a parameter. I want to use the member function of an object as the target.
I found this question according to which the answer is to use std::bind to bind the first first argument (the implicit this pointer) to the actual object pointer and then use it as the std::function argument.
This however doesn't work anymore in neither C++11, C++14 nor C++17?
Consider the following test program.
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdint>
#include <functional>
void Register(std::function<void(const uint8_t* data, size_t len)> func) {
//Dummy - directly call into function
func(nullptr, 0);
}
class TestClass {
public:
void TestRegister() {
Register(
std::bind(&TestClass::TestTarget, this, std::placeholders::_1)
);
}
void TestTarget(const uint8_t* data, size_t len) {
(void) data;
(void) len;
std::cout << "Hello there" << std::endl;
}
};
int main() {
TestClass testObj;
testObj.TestRegister();
return 0;
}
When compiling for -std=c++17 this throws a rather cryptic error message (I have no idea what it's trying to say here with Wrong number of arguments for pointer-to-member):
In file included from /home/max/Documents/TestingFunctions/main.cpp:3:0:
/usr/include/c++/7/functional: In instantiation of ‘struct std::_Bind_check_arity<void (TestClass::*)(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int), TestClass*, const std::_Placeholder<1>&>’:
/usr/include/c++/7/functional:854:12: required from ‘struct std::_Bind_helper<false, void (TestClass::*)(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int), TestClass*, const std::_Placeholder<1>&>’
/usr/include/c++/7/functional:875:5: required by substitution of ‘template<class _Func, class ... _BoundArgs> typename std::_Bind_helper<std::__is_socketlike<_Func>::value, _Func, _BoundArgs ...>::type std::bind(_Func&&, _BoundArgs&& ...) [with _Func = void (TestClass::*)(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int); _BoundArgs = {TestClass*, const std::_Placeholder<1>&}]’
/home/max/Documents/TestingFunctions/main.cpp:14:78: required from here
/usr/include/c++/7/functional:841:7: error: static assertion failed: Wrong number of arguments for pointer-to-member
static_assert(_Varargs::value
^~~~~~~~~~~~~
/home/max/Documents/TestingFunctions/main.cpp: In member function ‘void TestClass::TestRegister()’:
/home/max/Documents/TestingFunctions/main.cpp:14:26: error: could not convert ‘std::bind(_Func&&, _BoundArgs&& ...) [with _Func = void (TestClass::*)(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int); _BoundArgs = {TestClass*, const std::_Placeholder<1>&}; typename std::_Bind_helper<std::__is_socketlike<_Func>::value, _Func, _BoundArgs ...>::type = std::_Bind<void (TestClass::*(TestClass*, std::_Placeholder<1>))(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int)>](((TestClass*)this), std::placeholders::_1)’ from ‘std::_Bind_helper<false, void (TestClass::*)(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int), TestClass*, const std::_Placeholder<1>&>::type {aka std::_Bind<void (TestClass::*(TestClass*, std::_Placeholder<1>))(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int)>}’ to ‘std::function<void(const unsigned char*, long unsigned int)>’
std::bind(&TestClass::TestTarget, this, std::placeholders::_1)
~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Replacing the TestRegister function with one that does the exact same thing in a lambda expression compiles and runs without problems.
void TestRegister() {
Register(
[this](const uint8_t* data, size_t len) {
TestTarget(data, len);
}
);
}
Question: Why does the std::bind approach from the linked question not work? Was this feature removed or do I have an error in my code?
Your function Register expects a function with two parameters, but you try to pass to it a function with one placeholded parameter.
void TestRegister() {
Register(
std::bind(&TestClass::TestTarget, this, std::placeholders::_1, std::placeholders::_2)
);
}
Your function takes two parameters, while you are only passing one placeholder.
std::bind(&TestClass::TestTarget, this, std::placeholders::_1, std::placeholders::_2);

Template Parameter Pack Fails on Clang but not VS 2015

I'm working on a function which invokes a supplied function with a variable number of arguments. It compiles and works correctly on Visual Studio 2015, but fails to compile on Clang . I've prepared a demonstration which shows what I'm trying to do. The error I get in Clang is:
prog.cpp: In function 'int main()': prog.cpp:31:2: error: no matching
function for call to 'run(std::vector&, void ()(int&, const
int&), const int&)' ); ^ prog.cpp:7:6: note: candidate:
template void
run(std::vector&, const std::function&,
mutrArgs ...) void run(
^ prog.cpp:7:6: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed: prog.cpp:31:2: note: mismatched types 'const
std::function' and 'void ()(int&, const
int&)' );
#include <functional>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
template<int RepeatTimes, class ... mutrArgs>
void run(
vector<int>& vec,
const function<void(int&, mutrArgs ...)>& mutr,
mutrArgs ... args
)
{
for (int times{0} ; times < RepeatTimes ; ++times)
for (auto& item : vec)
mutr(item, args...);
}
void adder(int& i, const int& val)
{
i += val;
}
int main()
{
vector<int> v{0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9};
const int addValue{4};
run<2, const int&>(
v,
&adder,
addValue
);
for (auto i : v)
cout << i << " ";
cout << endl;
return 0;
}
run<2, const int&> just state the first argument, but doesn't deactivate deduction.
run<2, const int&>(v, &adder, addValue);
has 2 places to deduce mutrArgs:
addValue -> mutrArgs = { const int& }
&adder which is not a std::function and so fail.
Taking address of function fix that problem
auto call_run = &run<2, const int&>;
call_run(v, &adder, addValue);
Strangely, clang doesn't support the inlined usage contrary to gcc :/
(&run<2, const int&>)(v, &adder, addValue);
If you want to disable deduction, you may make your template arg non deducible:
template <typename T> struct identity { using type = T; };
template <typename T> using non_deducible_t = typename identity<T>::type;
And then
template<int RepeatTimes, class ... mutrArgs>
void run(
std::vector<int>& vec,
const std::function<void(int&, non_deducible_t<mutrArgs> ...)>& mutr,
non_deducible_t<mutrArgs> ... args
)
Demo
Even if in your case a simple typename F as suggested by Joachim Pileborg seems better.
If you look at all standard library algorithm function, at least the ones taking a "predicate" (a callable object) they take that argument as a templated type.
If you do the same it will build:
template<int RepeatTimes, typename F, class ... mutrArgs>
void run(
vector<int>& vec,
F mutr,
mutrArgs ... args
)
{
...
}
See here for an example of you code. Note that you don't need to provide all template arguments, the compiler is able to deduce them.