preventing unexpected macro re-expansion with boost? [duplicate] - c++

Question

This question already has answers here:
How do I temporarily disable a macro expansion in C/C++?
(6 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
The goal here is to simply get a, b, c out instead of their actual values. The setup is "simple enough":
#include <boost/preprocessor/seq/for_each_i.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/seq/for_each.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/stringize.hpp>
#include <iostream>
// Define "invalid" sequence first
#define SEQ (a)(b)(c)
// Try to create "final" value with `std::string("elem")`
// Brought in for explicit `std::string`, but no dice
#define MAKE_XSTRING(x) MAKE_STRING(x)
#define MAKE_STRING(x) std::string(#x)
// oh, the humanity! vvvvvvvvvvvv or BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE
#define HUMANIZE(r, data, elem) (MAKE_XSTRING(elem))
#define SEQ_HUMAN BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH(HUMANIZE,,SEQ)
So what I'm expecting at this point is what I have: a new sequence with (std::string("a")) etc:
// confirmation: vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
// warning: Humans: (std::string("a")) (std::string("b")) (std::string("c"))
#pragma message "Humans: " BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE(SEQ_HUMAN)
Thinking I'm so very clever and have gotten my values sorted out in some explicit strings, now I define the actual values for what the "real" code needs.
// Now that we have the "final" values, actually define the real values
// in real code, it's some lengthy nested namespaces (inconvenient to type)
#define a 123
#define b 456
#define c 789
And at long last, lets print them to make sure they aren't expanded:
// Let there be printing!
#define GOTTA_PRINT_EM_ALL(r,data,i,elem) << ((i)+1) << ". " << elem << std::endl
int main(int argc, const char **argv) {
std::cout << "Humans: " << std::endl
BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH_I(GOTTA_PRINT_EM_ALL,,SEQ_HUMAN);
}
But it seems the aliens did indeed take over:
Humans:
1. 123
2. 456
3. 789
Given that they're supposed to be std::string("a")...how the heck are the real values getting back in there?! I thought maybe the ("a") from the std::string constructor was creating issues, but it doesn't seem so (BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE results in same behavior). Any suggestions?

Answer 1

The macro indeed expands into code tokens:
test.cpp|24 col 1| note: #pragma message: Humans: (std::string("123")) (std::string("456")) (std::string("789"))
Now when you insert the code tokens into your GOTTA_PRINT_EM_ALL macro, you get
<< ((0)+1) << ". " << std::string(\"123\") << std::endl << ((1)+1) << ". " << std::string(\"456\") << std::endl << ((2)+1) << ". << std::string(\"789\")" << std::endl
Completely expectedly printing
Humans:
1. 123
2. 456
3. 789
To get the "code tokens" you need to stringize them as well:
// Let there be printing!
#define GOTTA_PRINT_EM_ALL(r,data,i,elem) << ((i)+1) << ". " << BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE(elem) << std::endl
Printing
Humans:
1. std::string("123")
2. std::string("456")
3. std::string("789")
See it Live On Coliru
#include <boost/preprocessor/seq/for_each_i.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/seq/for_each.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/stringize.hpp>
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#define a 123
#define b 456
#define c 789
#define SEQ (a)(b)(c)
// Try to create "final" value with `std::string("elem")`
// Brought in for explicit `std::string`, but no dice
#define MAKE_STRING(x) std::string(#x)
#define MAKE_XSTRING(x) MAKE_STRING(x)
#define HUMANIZE(r, data, elem) (MAKE_XSTRING(elem))
#define SEQ_HUMAN BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH(HUMANIZE,,SEQ)
// Let there be printing!
#define GOTTA_PRINT_EM_ALL(r,data,i,elem) << ((i)+1) << ". " << BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE(elem) << std::endl
int main() {
std::cout << "Humans: " << std::endl
BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH_I(GOTTA_PRINT_EM_ALL,,SEQ_HUMAN);
}