While exploring templates in C++, I stumbled upon the example in the following code:
#include <iostream>
#include <functional>
template <typename T>
void call(std::function<void(T)> f, T v)
{
f(v);
}
int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
auto foo = [](int i) {
std::cout << i << std::endl;
};
call(foo, 1);
return 0;
}
To compile this program, I am using the GNU C++ Compiler g++:
$ g++ --version // g++ (Ubuntu 6.5.0-1ubuntu1~16.04) 6.5.0 20181026
After compiling for C++11, I get the following error:
$ g++ -std=c++11 template_example_1.cpp -Wall
template_example_1.cpp: In function ‘int main(int, const char**)’:
template_example_1.cpp:15:16: error: no matching function for call to ‘call(main(int, const char**)::<lambda(int)>&, int)’
call(foo, 1);
^
template_example_1.cpp:5:6: note: candidate: template<class T> void call(std::function<void(T)>, T)
void call(std::function<void(T)> f, T v)
^~~~
template_example_1.cpp:5:6: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed:
template_example_1.cpp:15:16: note: ‘main(int, const char**)::<lambda(int)>’ is not derived from ‘std::function<void(T)>’
call(foo, 1);
^
(same for C++14 and C++17)
From the compiler error and notes I understand that the compiler failed to deduce the type of the lambda, since it cannot be matched against std::function.
Looking at previous questions (1, 2, 3, and 4) regarding this error, I am still confused about it.
As pointed out in answers from questions 3 and 4, this error can be fixed by explicitly specifying the template argument, like so:
int main(int argc, char const *argv[])
{
...
call<int>(foo, 1); // <-- specify template argument type
// call<double>(foo, 1) // <-- works! Why?
return 0;
}
However, when I use other types instead of int, like double, float, char, or bool, it works as well, which got me more confused.
So, my questions are as follow:
Why does it work when I explicitly specify int (and others) as the template argument?
Is there a more general way to solve this?
A std::function is not a lambda, and a lambda is not a std::function.
A lambda is an anonymous type with an operator() and some other minor utility. Your:
auto foo = [](int i) {
std::cout << i << std::endl;
};
is shorthand for
struct __anonymous__type__you__cannot__name__ {
void operator()(int i) {
std::cout << i << std::endl;
}
};
__anonymous__type__you__cannot__name__ foo;
very roughly (there are actual convert-to-function pointer and some other noise I won't cover).
But, note that it does not inherit from std::function<void(int)>.
A lambda won't deduce the template parameters of a std::function because they are unrelated types. Template type deduction is exact pattern matching against types of arguments passed and their base classes. It does not attempt to use conversion of any kind.
A std::function<R(Args...)> is a type that can store anything copyable that can be invoked with values compatible with Args... and returns something compatible with R.
So std::function<void(char)> can store anything that can be invoked with a char. As int functions can be invoked with a char, that works.
Try it:
void some_func( int x ) {
std::cout << x << "\n";
}
int main() {
some_func('a');
some_func(3.14);
}
std::function does that some conversion from its signature to the callable stored within it.
The simplest solution is:
template <class F, class T>
void call(F f, T v) {
f(v);
}
now, in extremely rare cases, you actually need the signature. You can do this in c++17:
template<class T>
void call(std::function<void(T)> f, T v) {
f(v);
}
template<class F, class T>
void call(F f_in, T v) {
std::function f = std::forward<F>(f_in);
call(std::move(f), std::forward<T>(v));
}
Finally, your call is a crippled version of std::invoke from c++17. Consider using it; if not, use backported versions.
Related
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.
I wrote some code that retrieves the types of the non-auto parameters when given a generic lambda function. As you can see in the code below, the idea is to call the connect function with a generic lambda and provide arguments for the auto parameters (which will always be at the front in my use case). So in the code below my goal was to detect that the second parameter is of type float.
The code works fine with clang 3.8 but it doesn't compile with gcc 6.1.1, so I was wondering whether this was a bug in gcc or if this is just not valid c++ code? Can I assume that a generic lambda is implemented with a templated operator() function or is this compiler-specific?
template <typename Functor, typename... AllArgs, typename... ProvidedArgs>
void findArgTypes(void(Functor::*)(AllArgs...) const, Functor, ProvidedArgs...)
{
// AllArgs == int, float
// ProvidedArgs == int
}
template <typename Func, typename... ProvidedArgs>
void connect(Func func, ProvidedArgs... providedArgs)
{
findArgTypes(&Func::template operator()<ProvidedArgs...>, func, providedArgs...);
}
int main()
{
int tmp = 0;
connect([&](auto, float){ ++tmp; }, 0);
}
The error that gcc gives is this:
main.cpp: In instantiation of ‘void connect(Func, ProvidedArgs ...) [with Func = main()::<lambda(auto:1, float)>; ProvidedArgs = {int}]’:
main.cpp:16:33: required from here
main.cpp:11:17: error: no matches converting function ‘operator()’ to type ‘void (struct main()::<lambda(auto:1, float)>::*)() const’
findArgTypes(&Func::template operator()<ProvidedArgs...>, func, providedArgs...);
~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
main.cpp:16:27: note: candidate is: template<class auto:1> main()::<lambda(auto:1, float)>
connect([](auto, float){}, 0);
^
Removing the const in findArgTypes gives the same result.
Using the following code works with both compilers:
struct Foo
{
template <typename T>
void operator()(T, float) const {}
};
int main()
{
Foo f;
connect(f, 0);
}
You have error because you are expecting functor (object) but lambda with empty capture is convertible to free function:
int main() {
using function = void (*)(int, float);
function a = [](auto, float){};
}
See lambda from cppreference:
For the newest version of your question that implementation satisfies both compilers:
template <typename Func, typename... ProvidedArgs>
void connect(Func func, ProvidedArgs... providedArgs)
{
auto mf = &Func::template operator()<ProvidedArgs...>;
findArgTypes(mf, func, providedArgs...);
}
I think this is gcc compiler bug that gcc needs this auto local variable to work correctly...
BTW, one question - one bug in clang, one in gcc - I really advice you to find simpler way to achieve your goals - maybe consider to just use std::function instead of quite fresh generic-lambda?
I am learning c++ template concepts. I do not understand the following.
#include <iostream>
#include <typeinfo>
using namespace std;
template <typename T>
T fun(T& x)
{
cout <<" X is "<<x;
cout <<"Type id is "<<typeid(x).name()<<endl;
}
int main ( int argc, char ** argv)
{
int a[100];
fun (a);
}
What i am trying?
1) T fun (T & x)
Here x is a reference, and hence will not decayed 'a' into pointer type,
but while compiling , i am getting the following error.
error: no matching function for call to ‘fun(int [100])’
When I try non-reference, it works fine. As I understand it the array is decayed into pointer type.
C-style arrays are very basic constructs which are not assignable, copyable or referenceable in the way built-ins or user defined types are. To achieve the equivalent of passing an array by reference, you need the following syntax:
// non-const version
template <typename T, size_t N>
void fun( T (&x)[N] ) { ... }
// const version
template <typename T, size_t N>
void fun( const T (&x)[N] ) { ... }
Note that here the size of the array is also a template parameter to allow the function to work will all array sizes, since T[M] and T[N] are not the same type for different M, N. Also note that the function returns void. There is no way of returning an array by value, since the array is not copyable, as already mentioned.
The problem is in the return type: you cannot return an array because arrays are non-copiable. And by the way, you are returning nothing!
Try instead:
template <typename T>
void fun(T& x) // <--- note the void
{
cout <<" X is "<<x;
cout <<"Type id is "<<typeid(x).name()<<endl;
}
And it will work as expected.
NOTE: the original full error message (with gcc 4.8) is actually:
test.cpp: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:
test.cpp:17:10: error: no matching function for call to ‘fun(int [100])’
fun (a);
^
test.cpp:17:10: note: candidate is:
test.cpp:7:3: note: template<class T> T fun(T&)
T fun(T& x)
^
test.cpp:7:3: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed:
test.cpp: In substitution of ‘template<class T> T fun(T&) [with T = int [100]]’:
test.cpp:17:10: required from here
test.cpp:7:3: error: function returning an array
The most relevant line is the last one.
I'm trying to use an ANSI C++ for_each statement to iterate over and print the elements of a standard vector. It works if I have the for_each call a non-overloaded function, but yields a compiler error if I have it call an overloaded function.
Here's a minimal test program to show where the compiler error occurs:
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
struct S {
char c;
int i;
};
std::vector<S> v;
void print_struct(int idx);
void print_struct(const struct S& s);
// f: a non-overloaded version of the preceding function.
void f(const struct S& s);
int main()
{
v.push_back((struct S){'a', 1});
v.push_back((struct S){'b', 2});
v.push_back((struct S){'c', 3});
for (unsigned int i = 0; i < v.size(); ++i)
print_struct(i);
/* ERROR! */
std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), print_struct);
/* WORKAROUND: */
std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), f);
return 0;
}
// print_struct: Print a struct by its index in vector v.
void print_struct(int idx)
{
std::cout << v[idx].c << ',' << v[idx].i << '\n';
}
// print_struct: Print a struct by reference.
void print_struct(const struct S& s)
{
std::cout << s.c << ',' << s.i << '\n';
}
// f: a non-overloaded version of the preceding function.
void f(const struct S& s)
{
std::cout << s.c << ',' << s.i << '\n';
}
I compiled this in openSUSE 12.2 using:
g++-4.7 -ansi -Wall for_each.cpp -o for_each
The full error message is:
for_each.cpp: In function ‘int main()’:
for_each.cpp:31:48: error: no matching function for call to ‘for_each(std::vector<S>::iterator, std::vector<S>::iterator, <unresolved overloaded function type>)’
for_each.cpp:31:48: note: candidate is:
In file included from /usr/include/c++/4.7/algorithm:63:0,
from for_each.cpp:5:
/usr/include/c++/4.7/bits/stl_algo.h:4436:5: note: template<class _IIter, class _Funct> _Funct std::for_each(_IIter, _IIter, _Funct)
/usr/include/c++/4.7/bits/stl_algo.h:4436:5: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed:
for_each.cpp:31:48: note: couldn't deduce template parameter ‘_Funct’
I don't see any search results for this particular error on Stack Overflow, or on the web generally. Any help would be appreciated.
A names refers to an overload set. You'll need to specify which overload you want:
std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), (void (&)(S const&)) print_struct);
Another approach is to use a polymorphic callable function object as a helper:
struct PrintStruct
{
template <typename T> void operator()(T const& v) const
{ return print_struct(v); }
};
int main()
{
PrintStruct helper;
std::vector<S> sv;
std::vector<int> iv;
// helper works for both:
std::for_each(sv.begin(), sv.end(), helper);
std::for_each(iv.begin(), iv.end(), helper);
std::for_each declaration looks like this:
template<class InputIter, class Func>
void for_each(InputIter first, InputIter last, Func func);
As you can see, it takes anything you give it as the third parameter. There is no restriction that it has to be a callable type of a certain signature or a callable type at all.
When dealing with overloaded functions, they're inherently ambiguous unless you give them some context to select the right one. In a call to an overloaded function, this context are the arguments you pass. When you need a pointer, however, you can't use arguments as a context, and the for_each parameter also doesn't count as a context, since it takes anything.
As an example of where a function parameter can be a valid context to select the right overload, see this:
// our overloads
void f(int){}
void f(double){}
typedef void (*funcptr_type)(int);
void g(funcptr_type){}
// ...
g(&f); // will select 'void f(int)' overload, since that's
// the only valid one given 'g's parameter
As you can see, you give a clear context here that helps the compiler select the right overload and not have it ambiguous. std::for_each's parameters do not give such a context, since they take anything.
There are two solutions:
manually provide the context either by
casting to the right function pointer type, or
using an intermediate variable of the right type and passing that
use a non-overloaded function that dispatches to an overloaded one (as you did with f)
Note that in C++11, you could also use a lambda for the second option:
std::for_each(v.begin(), v.end(), [](const S& s){ print_struct(s); });
Some notes on your code:
(struct S){'a', 1} is a compound literal and not standard C++
you don't need struct S in C++, only S suffices
I intend to use shared_ptr quite a bit in an upcoming project, so (not being aware of std::make_shared) I wanted to write a variadic template function spnew<T>(...) as a shared_ptr-returning stand-in for new. Everything went smoothly till I attempted to make use of a type whose constructor includes an initializer_list. I get the following from GCC 4.5.2 when I try to compile the minimal example below:
In function 'int main(int, char**)':
too many arguments to function 'std::shared_ptr spnew(Args ...) [with T = Example, Args = {}]'
In function 'std::shared_ptr spnew(Args ...) [with T = Example, Args = {}]':
no matching function for call to 'Example::Example()'
Oddly enough, I get equivalent errors if I substitute std::make_shared for spnew. In either case, it seems to be incorrectly deducing the parameters when an initializer_list is involved, erroneously treating Args... as empty. Here's the example:
#include <memory>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
struct Example {
// This constructor plays nice.
Example(const char* t, const char* c) :
title(t), contents(1, c) {}
// This one does not.
Example(const char* t, std::initializer_list<const char*> c) :
title(t), contents(c.begin(), c.end()) {}
std::string title;
std::vector<std::string> contents;
};
// This ought to be trivial.
template<class T, class... Args>
std::shared_ptr<T> spnew(Args... args) {
return std::shared_ptr<T>(new T(args...));
}
// And here are the test cases, which don't interfere with one another.
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
auto succeeds = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar");
auto fails = spnew<Example>("foo", {"bar"});
}
Is this just an oversight on my part, or a bug?
You could do this -
#include <memory>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
struct Example {
template<class... Args>
Example(const char* t, Args... tail) : title(t)
{
Build(tail...);
}
template<class T, class... Args>
void Build(T head, Args... tail)
{
contents.push_back(std::string(head));
Build(tail...);
}
template<class T>
void Build(T head)
{
contents.push_back(std::string(head));
}
void Build() {}
std::string title;
std::vector<std::string> contents;
};
template<class T, class... Args>
std::shared_ptr<T> spnew(Args... args) {
return std::shared_ptr<T>(new T(args...));
}
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
auto succeeds = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar");
auto fails = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar", "poo", "doo");
std::cout << "succeeds->contents contains..." << std::endl;
for ( auto s : succeeds->contents ) std::cout << s << std::endl;
std::cout << std::endl << "fails->contents contains..." << std::endl;
for ( auto s : fails->contents ) std::cout << s << std::endl;
}
This, despite the generic templates is type safe as the compiler will complain about
the contents.push_back if the passed type is not convertible to a const char *.
As described above, your code was working fine with gcc 4.6 however the warning you get is explained here
why-doesnt-my-template-accept-an-initializer-list, and is possibly not standards
compliant, although the c++0x standard is yet to be published so this could change.
With gcc-4.7 (probably would work on gcc-4.6 too, just branched) with warnings:
foo.cpp: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:
foo.cpp:29:47: warning: deducing ‘Args ...’ as ‘std::initializer_list<const
char*>’ [enabled by default]
foo.cpp:22:20: warning: in call to ‘std::shared_ptr<_Tp1> spnew(Args ...)
[with T = Example, Args = {const char*, std::initializer_list<const
char*>}]’ [enabled by default]
foo.cpp:29:47: warning: (you can disable this with -fno-deduce-init-list)
[enabled by default]
I'm not sure why anyone would want to beef about init-list deduction though.
There is a related thread:
Why doesn't my template accept an initializer list
Basically, a bare init-list doesn't have a type.