Convert variadic template to constexpr - c++

I'm wondering if it's possible to convert simple loop that is invoked through a parameter pack into a constexpr with simpler code. This example code demonstrates what I'm trying to do
struct Student {
AgeCategory age;
Income income;
bool is_student;
CreditRating credit_rating;
bool buys_computer;
};
auto find_probability(const double x, const double mean, const double stdev) -> double;
typedef std::tuple<double, double> MeanStdDev;
typedef std::vector<MeanStdDev> MeanStdDevVec;
// This code seems verbose to me. Is there a simpler way to express this
// loop which iterates over a vector and parameter pack, possibly
// using constexpr. C++14/17 idioms are fine.
template<typename Attr>
auto get_probability(const MeanStdDevVec& v, const size_t n, const Student& s, Attr attr) -> double {
double mean, stdev;
std::tie(mean, stdev) = v[n];
return find_probability(static_cast<double>(std::invoke(attr, s)), mean, stdev);
}
template<typename First, typename... Attr>
auto get_probability(const MeanStdDevVec& v, const size_t n, const Student& s, First f, Attr... attr) -> double {
double mean, stdev;
std::tie(mean, stdev) = v[n];
return find_probability(static_cast<double>(std::invoke(f,s)), mean, stdev) * get_probability(v, n + 1, s, attr...);
}
template<typename ...Attr>
auto calculate_class_probability(const std::map<bool, MeanStdDevVec>& summaries, const Student& s, Attr... attributes) {
for (const auto& i : summaries) {
get_probability(i.second, 0L, s, attributes...);
}
}
called from
Student s;
calculate_class_probability(class_summaries, s , &Student::age, &Student::income, &Student::credit_rating, &Student::is_student);

It doesn't necessarily make the code shorter as a whole, but it does separate out a generic part that you can reuse easily, and IMHO makes the code clearer. The key in this particular case is a function that maps packs into arrays of a certain type:
template <class T, class F, class ... Args>
std::array<T, sizeof...(Args)> pack_to_array(F f, Args&& ... args) {
return {(f(std::forward<Args>(args)))...};
}
In your case, this isn't quite enough, as you want to zip it with a vector. So a useful modification of this, would be to make the integer index of the pack element available and pass it to the function:
template <class T, class F, class ... Args>
std::array<T, sizeof...(Args)> index_pack_to_array(F f, Args&& ... args) {
std::size_t i = 0;
return {(f(i++, std::forward<Args>(args)))...};
}
Now, you can use this function like so:
template<typename... Attr>
double get_probability(const MeanStdDevVec& v, const Student& s, Attr... attr) {
assert(v.size() == sizeof...(Attr));
auto probs = index_pack_to_array<double>(
[&] (std::size_t i, auto&& a) -> double {
return // ... (get probability from v[i], s, and a)
},
std::forward<Attr>(attr)...);
return std::accumulate(probs.begin(), probs.end(), 1.0,
[] (double p1, double p2) { return p1 * p2; });
}

Not sure to understand what do you want, but I suppose you can throw away your getProbability() and rewrite calculate_class_probability() as follows
template <typename ... Attr>
auto calculate_class_probability
(std::map<bool, MeanStdDevVec> const & summaries,
Student const & s, Attr ... attributes)
{
using unusedT = int[];
for ( const auto & i : summaries )
{
double mean, stdev;
double prob {1.0};
std::size_t n {0};
(void)unusedT { (std::tie(mean, stdev) = i.second[n++],
prob *= find_probability(static_cast<double>(std::invoke(attributes,s)), mean, stdev),
0)... };
// in prob the calculate value
}
}
But: no: I don't think it's possible to write this as constexpr; the operator[] for std::vector<> isn't constexpr

Related

Improving fold function

I have implemented a simple fold function in C++ that accepts a lambda, and can fold multiple vectors at the same time at compile time. I am wondering if it could be simplified in some manner (I have provided both a recursive version and an iteratively recursive version - I am unsure which should have better performance): https://godbolt.org/z/39pW81
Performance optimizations are also welcome - in that regard is any of the two approaches faster?
template<int I, typename type_identity, typename type_head, int N, typename ...type_tail, int ...N_tail, typename Function>
auto foldHelperR(Function&& func, const type_identity& id, const tvecn<type_head, N>& head, const tvecn<type_tail, N_tail>&... tail)
{
if constexpr (I>0)
{
return func(foldHelperR<I-1>(std::forward<Function>(func), id, head, tail...), head[I], tail[I]...);
}
else
{
return func(id, head[0], tail[0]...);
}
}
template<int I, typename type_identity, typename type_head, int N, typename ...type_tail, int ...N_tail, typename Function>
auto foldHelperI(Function&& func, const type_identity id, const tvecn<type_head, N>& head, const tvecn<type_tail, N_tail>&... tail)
{
if constexpr (I<N-1)
{
return foldHelperI<I+1>(std::forward<Function>(func), func(id, head[I], tail[I]...), head, tail...);
}
else
{
return func(id, head[N-1], tail[N-1]...);
}
}
template<typename type_identity, typename type_head, int N_head, typename ...type_tail, int ...N_tail, typename Function = void (const type_identity&, const type_head&, const type_tail&...)>
constexpr auto fold(Function&& func, const type_identity& id, const tvecn<type_head, N_head>& head, const tvecn<type_tail, N_tail>&... tail)
{
static_assert(std::is_invocable_v<Function, const type_identity&, const type_head&, const type_tail &...>,
"The function cannot be invoked with these zip arguments (possibly wrong argument count).");
static_assert(all_equal_v<N_head, N_tail...>, "Vector sizes must match.");
//return foldHelperR<N_head-1>(std::forward<Function>(func), id, head, tail...);
return foldHelperI<0>(std::forward<Function>(func), id, head, tail...);
}
int main()
{
tvecn<int,3> a(1,2,3);
return fold([](auto x, auto y, auto z) {return x+y+z;}, 0, a, a);
}
and can fold multiple vectors at the same time at compile time
Not exactly: if you want to operate compile-time
(1) you have to define constexpr the tvecn constructor and
(2) you have to define constexpr the foldhelper function and
(3) you have to declare constexpr a
// VVVVVVVVV
constexpr tvecn<int,3> a(1,2,3);
(4) you have to place the result of fold in a constexpr variable (or, more generally speaking, in a place where the value is required compile time, as the size field of a C-style array, or a template value parameter, or a static_assert() test)
constexpr auto f = fold([](auto x, auto y, auto z) {return x+y+z;},
0, a, a);
I am wondering if it could be simplified in some manner
Sure.
First of all: if you can, avoid to reinventing the weel: your tvecn is a simplified version of std::array.
Suggestion: use std::array (if you can obviously)
Second: you tagged C++17 so you can use folding
Suggestion: use it also for all_equal
template <auto V0, auto ... Vs>
struct all_equal : public std::bool_constant<((V0 == Vs) && ...)>
{ };
template<auto ...N_pack>
constexpr bool all_equal_v = all_equal<N_pack...>::value;
More in general: when you have to define a custom type traits that has to provide a number, inherit (if possible) from std::integral_constant (or std::bool_constant, or std::true_type, or std::false_type: all std::integral_constant specializations). So you automatically inherit all std::integral_constant facilities.
Third: almost all C++ standard uses std::size_t, not int, for sizes.
Suggestion: when you have to do with sizes, use std::size_t, not int. This way you can avoid a lot of annoying troubles.
Fourth: from main() you should return only EXIT_SUCCESS (usually zero) or EXIT_FAILURE (usually 1)
Suggestion: avoid things as
return fold([](auto x, auto y, auto z) {return x+y+z;}, 0, a, a);
Fifth: never underestimate the power of the comma operator.
Suggestion: avoid recursion at all and use template folding also for the helper function; by example
template <std::size_t ... Is, typename F, typename T, typename ... As>
constexpr auto foldHelperF (std::index_sequence<Is...>,
F const & f, T id, As const & ... arrs)
{ return ( ..., (id = [&](auto i){ return f(id, arrs[i]...); }(Is))); }
that you can call as follows from fold()
return foldHelperF(std::make_index_sequence<N_head>{},
std::forward<Function>(func),
id, head, tail...);
The following is a full compiling, and simplified, example
#include <array>
#include <utility>
#include <iostream>
#include <type_traits>
template <auto V0, auto ... Vs>
struct all_equal : public std::bool_constant<((V0 == Vs) && ...)>
{ };
template<auto ...N_pack>
constexpr bool all_equal_v = all_equal<N_pack...>::value;
template <std::size_t ... Is, typename F, typename T, typename ... As>
constexpr auto foldHelperF (std::index_sequence<Is...>,
F const & f, T id, As const & ... arrs)
{ return ( ..., (id = [&](auto i){ return f(id, arrs[i]...); }(Is))); }
template <typename type_identity, typename type_head, std::size_t N_head,
typename ...type_tail, std::size_t ...N_tail,
typename Function = void (type_identity const &,
type_head const &,
type_tail const & ...)>
constexpr auto fold (Function && func, type_identity const & id,
std::array<type_head, N_head> const & head,
std::array<type_tail, N_tail> const & ... tail)
{
static_assert( std::is_invocable_v<Function, const type_identity&,
const type_head&, const type_tail &...>,
"The function cannot be invoked with these zip arguments"
" (possibly wrong argument count).");
static_assert( all_equal_v<N_head, N_tail...>,
"Vector sizes must match.");
return foldHelperF(std::make_index_sequence<N_head>{},
std::forward<Function>(func),
id, head, tail...);
}
int main()
{
constexpr std::array<int, 3u> b{2, 5, 7};
constexpr auto f = fold([](auto x, auto y, auto z) {return x+y+z;},
0, b, b);
std::cout << f << std::endl;
}
With Fold expression, it might be:
template <typename F, typename Init, std::size_t... Is, typename... Arrays>
constexpr auto fold_impl(F&& f, Init init, std::index_sequence<Is...>, Arrays&&... arrays)
{
auto l = [&](Init init, std::size_t i){ return f(init, arrays[i]...); };
return ((init = l(init, Is)), ...);
}
template <typename F, typename Init, typename Array, typename ... Arrays>
constexpr auto fold(F&& f, Init init, Array&& array, Arrays&&... arrays)
{
static_assert(((arrays.size() == array.size()) && ...));
return fold_impl(f, init, std::make_index_sequence<array.size()>{}, array, arrays...);
}
Demo

How to efficiently implement assign a vector's data to a number of variables?

For example
void assign(vector<int> const& v, int a, float b)
{
a = v[0];
b = (float)v[1];
}
Here the value types doesn't need to be same. I want to make a function to assign variable number of variables. I can use variadic function. But I think using parameter pack may be more efficient. How to implement it? Thanks!
Fold expressions to the rescue!
template <typename ...P> void assign(const std::vector<int> &v, P &... params)
{
std::size_t index = 0;
(void(params = static_cast<P>(v[index++])) , ...);
}
If if has to be in C++11, you could use the dummy array trick:
template <typename ...P> void assign(const std::vector<int> &v, P &... params)
{
std::size_t index = 0;
using dummy = int[];
(void)dummy{0, (void(params = static_cast<P>(v[index++])), 0) ...};
}

Template parameter denoting "something callable with particular signature"

I wanted the ability to write code like this:
SplineFunction<Polynomial<3>> cubicSplineFunction;
// ... here be some additional code to populate the above object ...
auto dydx = cubicSplineFunction.transform<Polynomial<2>>(const Polynomial<3>& cubicSpline){
return cubicSpline.derivative();
};
auto dsdx = cubicSplineFunction.transform<T/*?*/>([](const Polynomial<3>& cubicSpline){
Polynomial<2> dy = cubicSpline.derivative();
Polynomial<4> dsSquared = dy*dy + 1*1;
return [dsSquared](double x){ // Fixed in response to comment: capture by value
return std::sqrt(dsSquared);
};
});
dydx(1.0); // efficient evaluation of cubicSplineFunction's derivative
dsdx(2.0); // efficient evaluation of cubicSplineFunction's arc rate
So I implemented the classes below. But what type should I substitute for T (in line 8) above to denote "something callable with signature double(double)" ?
template<typename S>
struct SplineFunction {
std::vector<S> splines;
auto operator()(double t) const {
int i = static_cast<int>(t);
return splines[i](t - i);
}
template<typename R, typename F>
SplineFunction <R> transform(F f) const {
SplineFunction <R> tfs;
for (const auto& s : splines) {
tfs.splines.push_back(f(s));
}
return tfs;
}
// ... MORE CODE ...
}
template<int N>
struct Polynomial {
std::array<double, N+1> coeffs;
double operator()(double x) const;
Polynomial<N - 1> derivative() const;
// ... MORE CODE ...
}
template<int L, int M>
Polynomial<L+M> operator*(const Polynomial<L>& lhs, const Polynomial<M>& rhs);
template<int L>
Polynomial<L> operator+(Polynomial<L> lhs, double rhs);
// ... MORE CODE ...
template<class F, class R=std::result_of_t<F&(S const&)>>
SplineFunction<R> transform(F f) const
don't pass types expliclty; let them be deduced.
In c++11 do typename std::result_of<F&(S const&)>::type.
Decaying the R type (as in std decay) may also be smart, as SplineFunction stores its template parameter, and decay makes types more suitable for storage.

Cannot remove unwanted overloads

The function transform conducted by
const std::vector<int> a = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
const std::vector<double> b = {1.2, 4.5, 0.6};
const std::vector<std::string> c = {"hi", "howdy", "hello", "bye"};
std::vector<double> result(5);
transform<Foo> (result.begin(),
a.begin(), a.end(),
b.begin(), b.end(),
c.begin(), c.end());
is to carry out a generalization of std::transform on multiple containers, outputing the results in the vector result. One function with signature (int, double, const std::string&) would apparently be needed to handle the three containers in this example. But because the containers have different lengths, we instead need to use some overloads. I will test this using these member overloads of a holder class Foo:
static int execute (int i, double d, const std::string& s) {return i + d + s.length();}
static int execute (int i, const std::string& s) {return 2 * i + s.length();}
static int execute (int i) {return 3 * i - 1;}
However, the program will not compile unless I define three other overloads that are never even called, namely with arguments (int, double), (const std::string&) and (). I want to remove these overloads, but the program won't let me. You can imagine the problem this would cause if we had more than 3 containers (of different lengths), forcing overloads with many permutations of arguments to be defined when they are not even being used.
Here is my working program that will apparently show why these extraneous overloads are needed. I don't see how or why the are forced to be defined, and want to remove them. Why must they be there, and how to remove the need for them?
#include <iostream>
#include <utility>
#include <tuple>
bool allTrue (bool a) {return a;}
template <typename... B>
bool allTrue (bool a, B... b) {return a && allTrue(b...);}
template <typename F, size_t... Js, typename Tuple>
typename F::return_type screenArguments (std::index_sequence<>, std::index_sequence<Js...>, Tuple& tuple) {
return F::execute (*std::get<Js>(tuple)++...);
}
// Thanks to Barry for coming up with screenArguments.
template <typename F, std::size_t I, size_t... Is, size_t... Js, typename Tuple>
typename F::return_type screenArguments (std::index_sequence<I, Is...>, std::index_sequence<Js...>, Tuple& tuple) {
if (std::get<2*I>(tuple) != std::get<2*I+1>(tuple))
return screenArguments<F> (std::index_sequence<Is...>{}, std::index_sequence<Js..., 2*I>{}, tuple);
else
return screenArguments<F> (std::index_sequence<Is...>{}, std::index_sequence<Js...>{}, tuple);
}
template <typename F, typename Tuple>
typename F::return_type passCertainArguments (Tuple& tuple) {
return screenArguments<F> (std::make_index_sequence<std::tuple_size<Tuple>::value / 2>{},
std::index_sequence<>{}, tuple);
}
template <typename F, typename OutputIterator, std::size_t... Is, typename... InputIterators>
OutputIterator transformHelper (OutputIterator result, const std::index_sequence<Is...>&, InputIterators... iterators) {
auto tuple = std::make_tuple(iterators...);
while (!allTrue(std::get<2*Is>(tuple) == std::get<2*Is + 1>(tuple)...))
*result++ = passCertainArguments<F>(tuple);
return result;
}
template <typename F, typename OutputIterator, typename... InputIterators>
OutputIterator transform (OutputIterator result, InputIterators... iterators) {
return transformHelper<F> (result, std::make_index_sequence<sizeof...(InputIterators) / 2>{}, iterators...);
}
// Testing
#include <vector>
struct Foo {
using return_type = int;
static int execute (int i, double d, const std::string& s) {return i + d + s.length();}
static int execute (int i, const std::string& s) {return 2 * i + s.length();}
static int execute (int i) {return 3 * i - 1;}
// These overloads are never called, but apparently must still be defined.
static int execute () {std::cout << "Oveload4 called.\n"; return 0;}
static int execute (int i, double d) {std::cout << "Oveload5 called.\n"; return i + d;}
static int execute (const std::string& s) {std::cout << "Oveload6 called.\n"; return s.length();}
};
int main() {
const std::vector<int> a = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
const std::vector<double> b = {1.2, 4.5, 0.6};
const std::vector<std::string> c = {"hi", "howdy", "hello", "bye"};
std::vector<double> result(5);
transform<Foo> (result.begin(),
a.begin(), a.end(),
b.begin(), b.end(),
c.begin(), c.end());
for (double x : result) std::cout << x << ' '; std::cout << '\n';
// 4 11 8 11 14 (correct output)
}
The compiler does not know at compile time which combinations of functions will be used in runtime. So you have to implement all the 2^N functions for every combination. Also your approach will not work when you have containers with the same types.
If you want to stick with templates, my idea is to implement the function something like this:
template <bool Arg1, bool Arg2, bool Arg3>
static int execute (int *i, double *d, const std::string *s);
The template arguments Arg1, Arg2, Arg3 represent the validity of each parameter. The compiler will automatically generate all the 2^N implementations for every parameter combination. Feel free to use if statements inside this function instead of template specialization - they will be resolved at compile time to if (true) or if (false).
I think I got! Template the function Foo::execute according to the number of arguments that are actually needed, and let them all have the same arguments:
struct Foo {
using return_type = int;
template <std::size_t> static return_type execute (int, double, const std::string&);
};
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<3> (int i, double d, const std::string& s) {return i + d + s.length();}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<2> (int i, double, const std::string& s) {return 2 * i + s.length();}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<1> (int i, double, const std::string&) {return 3 * i - 1;}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<0> (int, double, const std::string&) {return 0;} // The only redundant specialization that needs to be defined.
Here is the full solution.
#include <iostream>
#include <utility>
#include <tuple>
#include <iterator>
bool allTrue (bool b) {return b;}
template <typename... Bs>
bool allTrue (bool b, Bs... bs) {return b && allTrue(bs...);}
template <typename F, std::size_t N, typename Tuple, typename... Args>
typename F::return_type countArgumentsNeededAndExecute (Tuple&, const std::index_sequence<>&, Args&&... args) {
return F::template execute<N>(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
template <typename F, std::size_t N, typename Tuple, std::size_t I, size_t... Is, typename... Args>
typename F::return_type countArgumentsNeededAndExecute (Tuple& tuple, const std::index_sequence<I, Is...>&, Args&&... args) { // Pass tuple by reference, because its iterator elements will be modified (by being incremented).
return (std::get<2*I>(tuple) != std::get<2*I + 1>(tuple)) ?
countArgumentsNeededAndExecute<F, N+1> (tuple, std::index_sequence<Is...>{}, std::forward<Args>(args)..., // The number of arguments to be used increases by 1.
*std::get<2*I>(tuple)++) : // Pass the value that will be used and increment the iterator.
countArgumentsNeededAndExecute<F, N> (tuple, std::index_sequence<Is...>{}, std::forward<Args>(args)...,
typename std::iterator_traits<typename std::tuple_element<2*I, Tuple>::type>::value_type{}); // Pass the default value (it will be ignored anyway), and don't increment the iterator. Hence, the number of arguments to be used does not change.
}
template <typename F, typename OutputIterator, std::size_t... Is, typename... InputIterators>
OutputIterator transformHelper (OutputIterator result, const std::index_sequence<Is...>& indices, InputIterators... iterators) {
auto tuple = std::make_tuple(iterators...); // Cannot be const, as the iterators are being incremented.
while (!allTrue(std::get<2*Is>(tuple) == std::get<2*Is + 1>(tuple)...))
*result++ = countArgumentsNeededAndExecute<F, 0> (tuple, indices); // Start the count at 0. Examine 'indices', causing the count to increase one by one.
return result;
}
template <typename F, typename OutputIterator, typename... InputIterators>
OutputIterator transform (OutputIterator result, InputIterators... iterators) {
return transformHelper<F> (result, std::make_index_sequence<sizeof...(InputIterators) / 2>{}, iterators...);
}
// Testing
#include <vector>
struct Foo {
using return_type = int;
template <std::size_t> static return_type execute (int, double, const std::string&);
};
// Template the function Foo::execute according to the number of arguments that are actually needed:
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<3> (int i, double d, const std::string& s) {return i + d + s.length();}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<2> (int i, double, const std::string& s) {return 2 * i + s.length();}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<1> (int i, double, const std::string&) {return 3 * i - 1;}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<0> (int, double, const std::string&) {return 0;} // The only redundant specialization that needs to be defined.
int main() {
const std::vector<int> a = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
const std::vector<double> b = {1.2, 4.5, 0.6};
const std::vector<std::string> c = {"hi", "howdy", "hello", "bye"};
std::vector<double> result(5);
transform<Foo> (result.begin(),
a.begin(), a.end(),
b.begin(), b.end(),
c.begin(), c.end());
for (double x : result) std::cout << x << ' '; std::cout << '\n';
// 4 11 8 11 14 (correct output)
}
And a second solution using Andrey Nasonov's bool templates to generate all 2^N overloads needed. Note that the above solution requires only N+1 template instantations for the overloads though.
#include <iostream>
#include <utility>
#include <tuple>
bool allTrue (bool b) {return b;}
template <typename... Bs>
bool allTrue (bool b, Bs... bs) {return b && allTrue(bs...);}
template <bool...> struct BoolPack {};
template <typename F, typename Tuple, bool... Bs, typename... Args>
typename F::return_type checkArgumentsAndExecute (const Tuple&, const std::index_sequence<>&, BoolPack<Bs...>, Args&&... args) {
return F::template execute<Bs...>(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
template <typename F, typename Tuple, std::size_t I, size_t... Is, bool... Bs, typename... Args>
typename F::return_type checkArgumentsAndExecute (Tuple& tuple, const std::index_sequence<I, Is...>&, BoolPack<Bs...>, Args&&... args) { // Pass tuple by reference, because its iterators elements will be modified (by being incremented).
return (std::get<2*I>(tuple) != std::get<2*I+1>(tuple)) ?
checkArgumentsAndExecute<F> (tuple, std::index_sequence<Is...>{}, BoolPack<Bs..., true>{}, std::forward<Args>(args)...,
*std::get<2*I>(tuple)++) : // Pass the value that will be used and increment the iterator.
checkArgumentsAndExecute<F> (tuple, std::index_sequence<Is...>{}, BoolPack<Bs..., false>{}, std::forward<Args>(args)...,
typename std::iterator_traits<typename std::tuple_element<2*I, Tuple>::type>::value_type{}); // Pass the default value (it will be ignored anyway), and don't increment the iterator.
}
template <typename F, typename OutputIterator, std::size_t... Is, typename... InputIterators>
OutputIterator transformHelper (OutputIterator& result, const std::index_sequence<Is...>& indices, InputIterators... iterators) {
auto tuple = std::make_tuple(iterators...); // Cannot be const, as the iterators are being incremented.
while (!allTrue(std::get<2*Is>(tuple) == std::get<2*Is + 1>(tuple)...))
*result++ = checkArgumentsAndExecute<F> (tuple, indices, BoolPack<>{});
return result;
}
template <typename F, typename OutputIterator, typename... InputIterators>
OutputIterator transform (OutputIterator result, InputIterators... iterators) {
return transformHelper<F> (result, std::make_index_sequence<sizeof...(InputIterators) / 2>{}, iterators...);
}
// Testing
#include <vector>
struct Foo {
using return_type = int;
template <bool B1, bool B2, bool B3> static return_type execute (int, double, const std::string&) {return 0;} // All necessary overloads defined at once here.
};
// Specializations of Foo::execute<B1,B2,B3>(int, double, const std::string&) that will actually be called by transform<Foo> (it is the client's responsibility to define these overloads based on the containers passed to transform<Foo>).
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<true, true, true> (int i, double d, const std::string& s) {return i + d + s.length();}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<true, false, true> (int i, double, const std::string& s) {return 2 * i + s.length();}
template <> Foo::return_type Foo::execute<true, false, false> (int i, double, const std::string&) {return 3 * i - 1;}
int main() {
const std::vector<int> a = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5};
const std::vector<double> b = {1.2, 4.5, 0.6};
const std::vector<std::string> c = {"hi", "howdy", "hello", "bye"};
std::vector<double> result(5);
transform<Foo> (result.begin(),
a.begin(), a.end(),
b.begin(), b.end(),
c.begin(), c.end());
for (double x : result) std::cout << x << ' '; std::cout << '\n';
// 4 11 8 11 14 (correct output)
}

Binary search using variadic templates and lambda functions

Consider this,
struct Person {
std::string name;
Person (const std::string& n) : name(n) {}
std::string getName(int, char) const {return name;} // int, char play no role in this
// simple example, but let's suppose that they are needed.
} *Bob = new Person("Bob"), *Frank = new Person("Frank"), *Mark = new Person("Mark"),
*Tom = new Person("Tom"), *Zack = new Person("Zack");
const std::vector<Person*> people = {Bob, Frank, Mark, Tom, Zack};
Because people is sorted by name, we can carry out a binary search to find the element of people with a specific name. I want the call for this to look something like
Person* person = binarySearch (people, "Tom",
[](Person* p, int n, char c) {return p->getName(n,c);},
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}, 5, 'a');
so the template function binarySearch can be used generically. I got it working with the following:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
#include <functional>
struct Person {
std::string name;
Person (const std::string& n) : name(n) {}
std::string getName(int, char) const {return name;} // int, char play no role in this
// simple example, but let's supposes that they are needed.
} *Bob = new Person("Bob"), *Frank = new Person("Frank"), *Mark = new Person("Mark"),
*Tom = new Person("Tom"), *Zack = new Person("Zack");
const std::vector<Person*> people = {Bob, Frank, Mark, Tom, Zack};
template <typename Container, typename Ret>
typename Container::value_type binarySearch (const Container& container, const Ret& value,
std::function<Ret(const typename Container::value_type&, int, char)> f,
std::function<bool(const Ret&, const Ret&)> comp,
typename Container::difference_type low, typename Container::difference_type high,
int n, char c) {
if (low > high)
std::cout << "Error! Not found!\n";
const typename Container::difference_type mid = (low + high) / 2;
const Ret& r = f(container[mid], n, c);
if (r == value)
return container[mid];
if (comp(r, value))
return binarySearch (container, value, f, comp, mid + 1, high, n, c);
return binarySearch (container, value, f, comp, low, mid - 1, n, c);
}
template <typename Container, typename Ret>
typename Container::value_type binarySearch (const Container& container, const Ret& value,
std::function<Ret(const typename Container::value_type&, int, char)> f,
std::function<bool(const Ret&, const Ret&)> comp, int n, char c) {
return binarySearch (container, value, f, comp, 0, container.size() - 1, n, c);
}
int main() {
const Person* person = binarySearch<std::vector<Person*>, std::string>
(people, "Tom", &Person::getName,
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}, 5, 'a');
std::cout << person->getName(5,'a') << '\n'; // Tom
}
But now for reasons I don't understand, I'm not able to replace the specific arguments int, char with Args.... You can go ahead and place Args... args and args... where needed in the above code, and it won't compile. What is wrong here? How to carry out this last step in the generalization? Or should the whole method be changed?
This is what I tried:
template <typename Container, typename Ret, typename... Args>
typename Container::value_type binarySearch (const Container& container, const Ret& value,
std::function<Ret(const typename Container::value_type&, Args...)> f,
std::function<bool(const Ret&, const Ret&)> comp,
typename Container::difference_type low, typename Container::difference_type high,
Args... args) {
if (low > high)
std::cout << "Error! Not found!\n";
const typename Container::difference_type mid = (low + high) / 2;
const Ret& r = f(container[mid], args...);
if (r == value)
return container[mid];
if (comp(r, value))
return binarySearch (container, value, f, comp, mid + 1, high, args...);
return binarySearch (container, value, f, comp, low, mid - 1, args...);
}
template <typename Container, typename Ret, typename... Args>
typename Container::value_type binarySearch (const Container& container, const Ret& value,
std::function<Ret(const typename Container::value_type&, Args...)> f,
std::function<bool(const Ret&, const Ret&)> comp, Args... args) {
return binarySearch (container, value, f, comp, 0, container.size() - 1, args...);
}
int main() {
const Person* person = binarySearch<std::vector<Person*>, std::string> (people, "Tom",
&Person::getName,
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}, 5, 'a');
std::cout << person->getName(5,'a') << '\n';
}
GCC 4.9.2:
[Error] no matching function for call to 'binarySearch(std::vector<Person*>&, const char [4], main()::__lambda0, main()::__lambda1, int, char)'
template argument deduction/substitution failed:
[Note] 'main()::__lambda0' is not derived from 'std::function<std::basic_string<char>(Person* const&, Args ...)>'
Update:
Having studied Yakk's solution, I've adapted my solution to the following (using more first principles instead of std::equal_range):
#include <iostream>
#include <iterator>
template <typename Container, typename T, typename Comparator = std::less<T>>
typename Container::value_type binarySearchRandomAccessIterator (const Container& container, T&& value, Comparator&& compare, typename Container::difference_type low, typename Container::difference_type high) {
if (low > high)
{std::cout << "Error! Not found!\n"; return container[high];}
const typename Container::difference_type mid = (low + high) / 2;
const auto& t = compare.function(container[mid]); // Using 'const T& t' does not compile.
if (t == value)
return container[mid];
if (compare.comparator(t, value)) // 't' is less than 'value' according to compare.comparator, so search in the top half.
return binarySearchRandomAccessIterator (container, value, compare, mid + 1, high);
return binarySearchRandomAccessIterator (container, value, compare, low, mid - 1); // i.e. 'value' is less than 't' according to compare.comparator, so search in the bottom half.
}
template <typename ForwardIterator, typename T, typename Comparator = std::less<T>>
typename std::iterator_traits<ForwardIterator>::value_type binarySearchNonRandomAccessIterator (ForwardIterator first, ForwardIterator last, T&& value, Comparator&& compare) {
ForwardIterator it;
typename std::iterator_traits<ForwardIterator>::difference_type count, step;
count = std::distance(first, last);
while (count > 0) { // Binary search using iterators carried out.
it = first;
step = count / 2;
std::advance(it, step); // This is done in O(step) time since ForwardIterator is not a random-access iterator (else it is done in constant time). But the good news is that 'step' becomes half as small with each iteration of this loop.
const auto& t = compare.function(*it); // Using 'const T& t' does not compile.
if (compare.comparator(t, value)) { // 't' is less than 'value' according to compare.comparator, so search in the top half.
first = ++it; // Thus first will move to one past the half-way point, and we search from there.
count -= step + 1; // count is decreased by half plus 1.
}
else // 't' is greater than 'value' according to compare.comparator, so remain in the bottom half.
count = step; // 'count' and 'step' are both decreased by half.
}
if (compare.function(*first) != value)
std::cout << "Error! Not found!\n";
return *first;
}
template <typename Container, typename T, typename Comparator = std::less<T>> // Actually the version below could be used if Container has a random-access iterator. It would be with the same time complexity since std::advance has O(1) time complexity for random-access iterators.
typename std::enable_if<std::is_same<typename std::iterator_traits<typename Container::iterator>::iterator_category, std::random_access_iterator_tag>::value, typename Container::value_type>::type
binarySearch (const Container& container, T&& value, Comparator&& compare = {}) {
std::cout << "Calling binarySearchWithRandomAccessIterator...\n";
return binarySearchRandomAccessIterator (container, value, compare, 0, container.size() - 1);
}
// Overload used if Container does not have a random-access iterator.
template <typename Container, typename T, typename Comparator = std::less<T>>
typename std::enable_if<!std::is_same<typename std::iterator_traits<typename Container::iterator>::iterator_category, std::random_access_iterator_tag>::value, typename Container::value_type>::type
binarySearch (const Container& container, T&& value, Comparator&& compare = {}) {
std::cout << "Calling binarySearchNonRandomAccessIterator...\n";
return binarySearchNonRandomAccessIterator (std::begin(container), std::end(container), value, compare);
}
template <typename Function, typename Comparator>
struct FunctionAndComparator {
Function function;
Comparator comparator;
FunctionAndComparator (Function&& f, Comparator&& c) : function(std::forward<Function>(f)), comparator(std::forward<Comparator>(c)) {}
};
template <typename Function, typename Comparator = std::less<>>
FunctionAndComparator<std::decay_t<Function>, std::decay_t<Comparator>> functionAndComparator (Function&& f, Comparator&& c = {}) {
return {std::forward<Function>(f), std::forward<Comparator>(c)};
}
#include <string>
#include <vector>
#include <list>
struct Person {
std::string name;
Person (const std::string& n) : name(n) {}
std::string getName (int, char) const {return name;} // int, char play no role in this simple example, but let's supposes that they are needed.
} *Bob = new Person("Bob"), *Frank = new Person("Frank"), *Mark = new Person("Mark"), *Tom = new Person("Tom"), *Zack = new Person("Zack");
const std::vector<Person*> peopleVector = {Bob, Frank, Mark, Tom, Zack};
const std::list<Person*> peopleList = {Bob, Frank, Mark, Tom, Zack};
int main() {
Person* tom = binarySearch (peopleVector, "Tom", functionAndComparator([](const Person* p) {return p->getName(5,'a');}, [](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}));
if (tom) std::cout << tom->getName(5,'a') << " found.\n";
Person* bob = binarySearch (peopleVector, "Bob", functionAndComparator([](const Person* p) {return p->getName(3,'k');})); // The default comparator, std::less<std::string>, is actually the same as the comparator used above.
if (bob) std::cout << bob->getName(3,'k') << " found.\n";
Person* frank = binarySearch (peopleList, "Frank", functionAndComparator([](const Person* p) {return p->getName(8,'b');}));
if (frank) std::cout << frank->getName(8,'b') << " found.\n";
Person* zack = binarySearch (peopleList, "Zack", functionAndComparator([](const Person* p) {return p->getName(2,'c');}));
if (zack) std::cout << zack->getName(2,'c') << " found.\n";
Person* mark = binarySearch (peopleList, "Mark", functionAndComparator([](const Person* p) {return p->getName(6,'d');}));
if (mark) std::cout << mark->getName(6,'d') << " found.\n";
}
In my opinion
Person* person = binarySearch (people, "Tom",
[](Person* p, int n, char c) {return p->getName(n,c);},
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}, 5, 'a');
is a horrible syntax. Your binarySearch function is resposible for way too many things.
But first, what went wrong: Your ambiguous error occurred because a lambda is not a std::function. It tries to deduce the std::function type from the lambda, and fails because they are unrelated types. The ability to deduce Args... from somewhere else doesn't help.
You can wrap your std::function arguments in:
template<class T>struct tag{using type=T;};
template<class Tag>using type_t=typename Tag::type;
template<class T>using identity=type_t<tag<T>>;
identity< std::function< whatever... > > and your code will start to compile (as Args... is deduced elsewhere). identity<?> blocks template type deduction on that argument, so the compiler doesn't try anymore, and instead deduces the type from the other arguments.
However, this is not a good solution.
A better solution is to make the type of f and c be F and C -- don't make them into std::functions at all. This removes pointless type-erasure overhead, and removes the need for identity<?>
This is still not a good solution, because your template function does a bunch of things, few of them well. Instead, decompose your operation into simpler problems, then compose those together:
First, we already have std::equal_range, which is going to be a better binary search than any you are likely to write. Writing a function that returns a single element, and takes a container, seems reasonable, as working with iterators is annoying.
To pull this off, first we write some range-based boilerplate:
namespace adl_aux {
using std::begin; using std::end;
template<class R>
auto adl_begin(R&&)->decltype(begin(std::declval<R>()));
template<class R>
auto adl_end(R&&)->decltype(end(std::declval<R>()));
}
template<class R>
using adl_begin = decltype(adl_aux::adl_begin(std::declval<R>));
template<class R>
using adl_end = decltype(adl_aux::adl_end(std::declval<R>));
template<class R>using iterator_t = adl_begin<R>;
template<class R>using value_t = std::remove_reference_t<decltype(*std::declval<iterator_t<R>>())>;
This allows us to support std:: containers and arrays and 3rd party iterable containers and ranges. The adl_ stuff does argument dependent lookup of begin and end for us. The iterator_t and value_t does SFINAE-friendly determining of the value and iterator type of a range.
Now, bin_search on top of that boilerplate:
template<class R, class T, class F=std::less<T>>
value_t<R>* bin_search( R&& r, T&& t, F&& f={} ) {
using std::begin; using std::end;
auto range = std::equal_range( begin(r), end(r), std::forward<T>(t), std::forward<F>(f) );
if (range.first==range.second) return nullptr;
return std::addressof( *range.first ); // in case someone overloaded `&`
}
which returns a pointer to the element t under the ordering f presuming R is sorted under it if it exists, and otherwise nullptr.
The next part is your ordering mess:
[](Person* p, int n, char c) {return p->getName(n,c);},
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}, 5, 'a'
first, get rid of that args...:
[](int n, char c){
return [n,c](Person* p) {return p->getName(n,c);}
}(5,'a'),
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}
if you really need to do it on one line, do the binding directly.
Next, we want order_by:
template<class F, class C>
struct order_by_t : private F, private C {
F const& f() const { return *this; }
C const& c() const { return *this; }
template<class T>
auto f(T&&t)const
->decltype( std::declval<F const&>()(std::declval<T>()) )
{
return f()(std::forward<T>(t));
}
template<class T, class... Unused> // Unused to force lower priority
auto f(T&&t, Unused&&... ) const
-> std::decay_t<T>
{ return std::forward<T>(t); }
template<class Lhs, class Rhs>
bool operator()(Lhs&& lhs, Rhs&& rhs) const {
return c()( f(std::forward<Lhs>(lhs)), f(std::forward<Rhs>(rhs)) );
}
template<class F0, class C0>
order_by_t( F0&& f_, C0&& c_ ):
F(std::forward<F0>(f_)), C(std::forward<C0>(c_))
{}
};
template<class C=std::less<>, class F>
auto order_by( F&& f, C&& c={} )
-> order_by_t<std::decay_t<F>, std::decay_t<C>>
{ return {std::forward<F>(f), std::forward<C>(c)}; }
order_by takes a projection from a domain to a range, and optionally an ordering on that range, and produces an ordering on the domain.
order_by(
[](int n, char c){
return [n,c](Person const* p)
->decltype(p->getName(n,c)) // SFINAE enabled
{return p->getName(n,c);};
}(5,'a'),
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}
}
is now an ordering on Person const*s that follows your requirements.
We then feed this into bin_search:
auto ordering = order_by(
[](int n, char c){
return [n,c](Person const* p)
->decltype(p->getName(n,c)) // SFINAE enabled
{return p->getName(n,c);}
}(5,'a'),
[](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;}
);
Person*const* p = bin_search( people, "Tom", ordering );
now, some care had to be made to make order_by a "transparent" function object, where it accepts both things that can be projected (under the projection) and cannot be (which are passed directly to the comparator).
This requires that the projection operation be SFINAE friendly (ie, that it "fail early"). To this end, I explicitly determined its return type. (Below we see that this is not required, but it may be in more complex situations).
Live example.
Amusingly, your [](const std::string& x, const std::string& y) {return x.compare(y) < 0;} agrees with operator< on a std::string, so you could drop that (and make order_by simpler). However, I suspect your real use case needs it, and it is a useful feature to fortify order_by with.
Finally, note that this part:
[](int n, char c){
return [n,c](Person const* p)
->decltype(p->getName(n,c)) // SFINAE enabled
{return p->getName(n,c);}
}(5,'a'),
is ugly, and can be replaced with:
[](Person const* p)
->decltype(p->getName(5,'a')) // SFINAE enabled
{return p->getName(5,'a');}
which is less ugly. Also, because the parameter check of the lambda is enough, we can drop the SFINAE explicit return type stuff:
[](Person const* p)
{return p->getName(5,'a');}
and we are done. Simpler example:
auto ordering = order_by(
[](Person const* p)
{return p->getName(5,'a');}
);
Person*const* p = bin_search( people, "Tom", ordering );
or even:
Person*const* p = bin_search( people, "Tom",
order_by( [](Person const* p) {return p->getName(5,'a');} )
);
which looks far less ugly, no?
Oh, and:
using std::literals;
Person*const* p = bin_search( people, "Tom"s,
order_by( [](Person const* p) {return p->getName(5,'a');} )
);
might have better performance, as it will avoid repeatedly constructing a std::string("Tom") on every comparison. Similarly, a getName that returns a std::string const& (if possible) can also give a performance boost. The "projection lambda" might have to have a ->decltype(auto) in it to realise this second boost.
I used some C++14 above. The std::remove_reference_t<?> (and similar) aliases can be replaced with typename std::remove_reference<?>::type, or you can write your own _t aliases. The advice to use decltype(auto) can be replaced with decltype(the return expression) in C++11.
order_by_t uses inheritance to store F and C because they are likely to be empty classes, so I wanted to exploit the empty base optimization.