I wondered if I could auto deduce the size of an array, which is passed as a template parameter, without (explicitly) passing its size.
The following code both compiles warning-less on g++ 4.8 and clang++ 3.3 (using -std=c++11 -Wall).
#include <iostream>
template<const int* arr>
struct array_container
{
static constexpr int val = arr[1];
array_container() {
std::cout << val << std::endl;
}
// static constexpr int arr_size = ??;
};
constexpr int one[] = { 1 };
constexpr int two[] = { 1, 2 };
int main()
{
// array_container<one> array_one;
array_container<two> array_two;
// (void) array_one;
(void) array_two;
return 0;
}
However, if I remove the two comment signs in main(), I get an out of bound error with both compilers.
Now, this is cool. Somehow the compiler knows the size of the array, though the type of const int* arr is a pointer. Is there any way to get the size of arr, e.g. to complete my comment in array_container?
Of course, you are not allowed to
Use any macros
Store the size in arr (e.g. passing an std::array as template parameter: constexpr std::array<int, 1> one = { 1 }, or using an end marker like '\0' in strings)
Use an additional template parameter for the size that can not be auto deduced (array_container<1, one> array_one).
Maybe std::extent template from <type_traits> header of C++11 standard library is what you want:
#include <iostream>
#include <type_traits>
constexpr int one[] = { 1 };
constexpr int two[] = { 1, 2 };
int main()
{
std::cout << std::extent<decltype(one)>::value << std::endl;
std::cout << std::extent<decltype(two)>::value << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Output:
1
2
template<size_t size>
constexpr size_t arraySize ( const int ( &arrayRef ) [size] ) {
return size;
}
int main(){
int A[1];
int B[2];
cout << arraySize(A) << arraySize(B);
return 0;
}
I believe something like this is what you're looking for, using array references. The syntax for declaring an array reference looks kind of like the syntax for a function pointer. This function template accepts an array reference named arrayRef, which prevents array-to-pointer decay so that compile-time info about array size is preserved. As you can see, the template argument is implicit to the compiler. Note that this can only work when the size can be deduced at compile time. Interestingly, this should still work without naming arrayRef at all. To make the above template more useful, you can add a template parameter to deduce the type of the array as well. I left it out for clarity.
Probably not, as SFINAE only happens in the immediate context, while that error comes from the requirement that UB in constexpr lead to a compile time error, which I think is not immediate. You could try a recursive SFINAE that stops on the UB, but even if it worked you would have to both check the standard and hope it does not change (as it is rather obscure and new).
The easy way is to ise s function to deduce the array size, have to explicitly pass it to the type, then store it in an auto. Probably not what you want.
There are proposals to allow type parameters to be deduced from value parameters, so you could wait for those instead.
Not a solid answer, more of an extended comment, so marked community wiki.
It is indeed possible. I found a solution using SFINAE. What it basically does is produce a substitution error if the index is out of bound (line 3 in this example):
template<class C>
static yes& sfinae(typename val_to_type<
decltype(*C::cont::data), *(C::cont::data + C::pos)>::type );
template<class C>
static no& sfinae(C );
The full source code is on github.
There are only two disadvantages:
You have to specify the type of the array (this can not be avoided)
It only works with g++ 4.8.1 and clang 3.3. g++ fails for empty strings (with a compiler bug). If someone can test for other compilers, that would be appreciated.
Related
I found this gem in our codebase.
constexpr bool ConstexprStrBeginsWithImpl(const char* str, const char* subStr)
{
return !subStr[0] ? true : (str[0] == subStr[0] && ConstexprStrBeginsWithImpl(str + 1, subStr + 1));
}
template<int N, int M>
constexpr bool ConstexprStrBeginsWith(const char(&str)[N], const char(&subStr)[M])
{
static_assert(M <= N, "The substring to test is longer than the total string");
return ConstexprStrBeginsWithImpl(str, subStr);
}
Now I get what it does (comparing two constant strings as a constexpr), but what is this strange calling syntax const char(&str)[N]? to deduce the template int-parameter with the length of a constant char? How does this work? How is that a legal syntax? :-O
I thought you had to declare a constant char array parameter like this: const char str[N]?
If I use that - to me more logical - version, then my compilers (VCL and GCC) complain that they can't deduce the int-parameter N when using the constexpr as a parameter to another template with a bool. For example in this scenario:
template<bool B> struct Yada { int i = 23; };
template<> struct Yada<true> { int i = 42; };
int main()
{
Yada<ConstexprStrBeginsWith("foobar", "foo")> y;
std::cout << y.i;
}
This only compiles, if I declare str and subStr via const char(&str)[N] instead of just const char str[N].
So.... I am happy that it compiles and it looks certainly clever, but.. is this legal syntax? What is declared here? :-O. #justcurious
Greetings, Imi.
Thanks to #Thomas, #Jarod42 and #largest_prime_is_463035818, I could piece the puzzle together:
The & before the "str" is to declare a reference to an char-array instead of a char array by-value. The parenthesis are needed due to binding rules.
The reason that the template can not deduce the size of the char array if passed by-value is, that these old c-arrays are decaying to pointers, whereas references to C-arrays are never decaying. Jarod42 has a nice example of how to use templates instead - if (for some reason) you don't like to use references to c-arrays.
In my file I have created function length that must return length of auto type array, but instead of right answer it everytime returns 1.
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int length(auto arr){
return sizeof(arr) / sizeof(*arr);
}
int main(){
int arr[] = {1,2,3,4,5,0};
// Test
cout << length(arr); // it returns 1 but the right answer is 6
return 0;
}
You are using a C-style array, and this type cannot be copied.
If we assume that your compiler has a version that supports
auto parameters, it's like if it had a template parameter
that would be deduced to int * here, because instead
of being copied, a C-style array decays to int *.
In this case, sizeof(arr) is sizeof(int *) which is probably
4 on a 32-bit system or 8 on a 64-bit system.
sizeof(*arr) is sizeof(int) and is probably 4 on most systems.
Thus sizeof(arr)/sizeof(arr[0]) in length() will probably
always give 1 or 2.
If you want such a function returning the number of elements
of an array, you could use the std::array() type as many
comments suggest.
An alternative is to provide a template function
that is aware of the constant (known at compile time) size of the array.
/**
g++ -std=c++17 -o prog_cpp prog_cpp.cpp \
-pedantic -Wall -Wextra -Wconversion -Wno-sign-conversion \
-g -O0 -UNDEBUG -fsanitize=address,undefined
**/
#include <iostream>
template<typename T,
int N>
int
length([[maybe_unused]] const T(&arr)[N])
{
return N;
}
int
main()
{
int arr[] = {1,2,3,4,5,0};
std::cout << length(arr) << '\n';
return 0;
}
Ah yes, you've fallen victim to the classic array decay problem.
When have a function that takes in an array, C passes it as a pointer, because "array" isn't a passable data type. You get 1 because sizeof(arr) == sizeof(size_t) == sizeof(*arr) == sizeof(int), so sizeof(arr) / sizeof(*arr) == 1.
Unfortunately, there is no way to find the length of C-style arrays in a subfunction. However, some things you can do:
You can pass the length into the function as well. Unfortunately, this is pretty self-defeating if you want a length function. However, it's used for many C-style applications which need to support null bytes.
You can use the C++ style std::array, which allows you to find the size of the array with size(). This allows you to create an array without having to play with C shenanigans. You can also use std::vector, which is variable-size instead of fixed-size.
It's impossible to pass an array to a function directly (by value, that is), attempting to do so passes a pointer to its first element instead. Other answers have already explained this.
What you can do is pass a reference:
int length(const auto &arr)
{
return sizeof(arr) / sizeof(*arr);
}
This works for arrays, but gives wrong results for pointers, standard containers, etc.
To make it more bullet-proof, you can rewrite it to make it accept references to arrays only:
template <typename T, std::size_t N>
std::size_t length(const T (&)[N])
{
return N;
}
But we already have a standard function that does exactly this, it's called std::size. And it's also overloaded to work with containers.
The fact your code compiles at all is because your compiler (gcc?) supports a non-standard extension.
You would be better off using standard containers (e.g. std::vector<int> if the size is determined at run time, or std::array<int, 6> if the size is fixed at compile time).
But, for a function that takes a raw array and gives its size, you can simply pass a reference;
int length(const auto &arg) {return sizeof(arr)/sizeof(*arr);}
or
template<int N> int length(const int (&arr)[N])
{
return N;
}
Depending on your needs, the function can also be made constexpr and noexcept.
In C++17 and later, simply use the helper function std::size() (supplied in various standard headers, such as <iterator>, and works with a raw array as well as standard containers)
int main(){
int arr[] = {1,2,3,4,5,0};
cout << std::size(arr);
return 0;
}
Let's say I have a function like:
int test(std::array<char, 8>* data) {
char buffer[data->size() * 2];
[... some code ...]
}
clearly the size of the buffer can be evaluated at compile time: data has a constexpr size of 8 elements, 8 * 2 = 16 bytes.
However, when compiling with -Wall, -pedantic and -std=c++11 I get the infamous error:
warning: variable length arrays are a C99 feature [-Wvla-extension]
which I believe makes sense: array::size() is constexpr, but it is still a method, and in the function above we still have to dereference a pointer, which is not constexpr.
If I try something like:
int test(std::array<char, 8>& data) {
char buffer[data.size() * 2];
[...]
}
gcc (tried version 5.2.0) seems happy: there is no warning.
But with clang++ (3.5.1) I still get a warning complaining about variable length arrays.
In my case, I can't easily change the signature of test, it has to take a pointer. So... a few questions:
What is the best / most standard way to get the size of a std::array pointer in constexpr context?
Is the difference in behavior with pointers vs references expected? Which compiler is right about the warning, gcc or clang?
I do not know about 2.
But for 1, we can do this:
template<class T, size_t N>
constexpr std::integral_constant<size_t, N> array_size( std::array<T, N> const& ) {
return {};
}
then:
void test(std::array<char, 8>* data) {
using size=decltype(array_size(*data));
char buffer[size{}];
(void)buffer;
// [... some code ...]
}
alternatively:
template<class T, class U, size_t N>
std::array<T,N> same_sized_array( std::array< U, N > const& ) {
return {};
}
void test(std::array<char, 8>* data) {
auto buffer = same_sized_array<char>(*data);
(void)buffer;
// [... some code ...]
}
finally, a C++14 cleanup:
template<class A>
constexpr const decltype(array_size( std::declval<A>() )) array_size_v = {};
void test3(std::array<char, 8>* data) {
char buffer[array_size_v<decltype(*data)>];
(void)buffer;
// [... some code ...]
}
Live example.
The good old C way would be a define, but C++ has const int or for C++11 constexpr. So if you want the compiler to be aware that the size of the array is a compile time constant, the most portable(*) way would be to make it a const or constexpr:
#include <iostream>
#include <array>
const size_t sz = 8; // constexpr size_t sz for c++11
int test(std::array<char, sz>* data) {
char buffer[sz * 2];
buffer[0] = 0;
return 0;
}
int main()
{
std::array<char, sz> arr = { { 48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55 } };
int cr = test(&arr);
std::cout << cr << std::endl;
return 0;
}
It compiles without a warning, even with -Wall -pedantic under Clang 3.4.1
For the second question, I cannot imagine why gcc make that difference between pointers and refs here. Either it can determine that size() method on an std::array whose size is a constant is a constant expression - and it should allow both - or it cannot - and it should emit same warning on both. But it does not only concern the compiler, but also the standard library implementation.
The real problem is that pre-C++11 std::array was not part of the standard library, and constexpr is also defined only from C++11 on. So in pre-C++11 mode, both compiler process std::array as an extension, but there is no way for the size method to declare its return value to be a constant expr. This explains why Clang (and gcc facing a pointer) emits the warning.
But if you compile original code in c++11 mode (-std=c++11) you should have no warning, because the standard requires size() method on a std::array to be a constexpr.
(*) The question is about best / most standard ; I cannot say what is best way, and I cannot define most standard either, so I stick to what I would use if I wanted to avoid portability problems on non C++11 compilers.
What about using std::tuple_size on the decltype of your parameter ?
void test(std::array<char, 8>* data) {
using data_type = std::remove_pointer<decltype(data)>::type;
char buffer[std::tuple_size<data_type>::value * 2];
static_assert(sizeof buffer == 16, "Ouch");
// [... some code ...]
}
I need to know how many items in parameter pack of a variadic templete.
my code:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
template <int... Entries>
struct StaticArray
{
int size = sizeof... (Entries);// line A
//int array[size] = {Entries...};// line B
};
int main()
{
StaticArray<1,2,3,4> sa;
cout << sa.size << endl;
return 0;
}
I got compilation error on line A.
if change this line to
static const unsigned short int size = sizeof...(Arguments)
It can be compiled. my first question is why I need "static const unsigned short" to get compiled.
as you can see, I need a size to put in on my array. my final goal is able to print this array out in main function.
please help. thanks..
my ideal comes from this website but i dont know how to make it works
http://thenewcpp.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/variadic-templates-part-1-2/
As per the comments, I think this is a bug in g++'s handling of the new in-class initialisation of member variables. If you change the code to
template <int... Entries>
struct StaticArray
{
static const int size = sizeof...(Entries); // works fine
};
then it works correctly, because this uses the C++03 special case of initialising static const integral members in-class.
Similarly, if you use the new C++11 uniform initialisation syntax, it works correctly:
template <int... Entries>
struct StaticArray
{
int size{sizeof...(Entries)}; // no problem
};
I'm pretty sure the assignment form is valid here, so I think g++ (4.8.2 on my system) is getting it wrong.
(Of course, the size can't change at run-time, so the correct declaration would probably be static constexpr std::size_t size anyway, avoiding this problem...)
This is just something that has bothered me for the last couple of days, I don't think it's possible to solve but I've seen template magic before.
Here goes:
To get the number of elements in a standard C++ array I could use either a macro (1), or a typesafe inline function (2):
(1)
#define sizeof_array(ARRAY) (sizeof(ARRAY)/sizeof(ARRAY[0]))
(2)
template <typename T>
size_t sizeof_array(const T& ARRAY){
return (sizeof(ARRAY)/sizeof(ARRAY[0]));
}
As you can see, the first one has the problem of being a macro (for the moment I consider that a problem) and the other one has the problem of not being able to get the size of an array at compile time; ie I can't write:
enum ENUM{N=sizeof_array(ARRAY)};
or
BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT(sizeof_array(ARRAY)==10);// Assuming the size 10..
Does anyone know if this can be solved?
Update:
This question was created before constexpr was introduced. Nowadays you can simply use:
template <typename T>
constexpr auto sizeof_array(const T& iarray) {
return (sizeof(iarray) / sizeof(iarray[0]));
}
Try the following from here:
template <typename T, size_t N>
char ( &_ArraySizeHelper( T (&array)[N] ))[N];
#define mycountof( array ) (sizeof( _ArraySizeHelper( array ) ))
int testarray[10];
enum { testsize = mycountof(testarray) };
void test() {
printf("The array count is: %d\n", testsize);
}
It should print out: "The array count is: 10"
In C++1x constexpr will get you that:
template <typename T, size_t N>
constexpr size_t countof(T(&)[N])
{
return N;
}
The best I can think of is this:
template <class T, std::size_t N>
char (&sizeof_array(T (&a)[N]))[N];
// As litb noted in comments, you need this overload to handle array rvalues
// correctly (e.g. when array is a member of a struct returned from function),
// since they won't bind to non-const reference in the overload above.
template <class T, std::size_t N>
char (&sizeof_array(const T (&a)[N]))[N];
which has to be used with another sizeof:
int main()
{
int a[10];
int n = sizeof(sizeof_array(a));
std::cout << n << std::endl;
}
[EDIT]
Come to think of it, I believe this is provably impossible to do in a single "function-like call" in C++03, apart from macros, and here's why.
On one hand, you will clearly need template parameter deduction to obtain size of array (either directly, or via sizeof as you do). However, template parameter deduction is only applicable to functions, and not to classes; i.e. you can have a template parameter R of type reference-to-array-of-N, where N is another template parameter, but you'll have to provide both R and N at the point of the call; if you want to deduce N from R, only a function call can do that.
On the other hand, the only way any expression involving a function call can be constant is when it's inside sizeof. Anything else (e.g. accessing a static or enum member on return value of function) still requires the function call to occur, which obviously means this won't be a constant expression.
It's not exactly what you're looking for, but it's close - a snippet from winnt.h which includes some explanation of what the #$%^ it's doing:
//
// RtlpNumberOf is a function that takes a reference to an array of N Ts.
//
// typedef T array_of_T[N];
// typedef array_of_T &reference_to_array_of_T;
//
// RtlpNumberOf returns a pointer to an array of N chars.
// We could return a reference instead of a pointer but older compilers do not accept that.
//
// typedef char array_of_char[N];
// typedef array_of_char *pointer_to_array_of_char;
//
// sizeof(array_of_char) == N
// sizeof(*pointer_to_array_of_char) == N
//
// pointer_to_array_of_char RtlpNumberOf(reference_to_array_of_T);
//
// We never even call RtlpNumberOf, we just take the size of dereferencing its return type.
// We do not even implement RtlpNumberOf, we just decare it.
//
// Attempts to pass pointers instead of arrays to this macro result in compile time errors.
// That is the point.
//
extern "C++" // templates cannot be declared to have 'C' linkage
template <typename T, size_t N>
char (*RtlpNumberOf( UNALIGNED T (&)[N] ))[N];
#define RTL_NUMBER_OF_V2(A) (sizeof(*RtlpNumberOf(A)))
The RTL_NUMBER_OF_V2() macro ends up being used in the more readable ARRAYSIZE() macro.
Matthew Wilson's "Imperfect C++" book also has a discussion of the techniques that are used here.
The Problem
I like Adisak's answer:
template <typename T, size_t N>
char ( &_ArraySizeHelper( T (&arr)[N] ))[N];
#define COUNTOF( arr ) (sizeof( _ArraySizeHelper( arr ) ))
It's what Microsoft uses for the _countof macro in VS2008, and it's got some nice features:
It operates at compile time
It's typesafe (i.e. it will generate a compile-time error if you give it a pointer, which arrays degrade too all too easily)
But as pointed out by Georg, this approach uses templates, so it's not guaranteed to work with local types for C++03:
void i_am_a_banana() {
struct { int i; } arr[10];
std::cout << COUNTOF(arr) << std::endl; // forbidden in C++03
}
Fortunately, we're not out luck.
The Solution
Ivan Johnson came up with a clever approach that wins on all accounts: it's typesafe, compile-time, and works with local types:
#define COUNTOF(arr) ( \
0 * sizeof(reinterpret_cast<const ::Bad_arg_to_COUNTOF*>(arr)) + \
0 * sizeof(::Bad_arg_to_COUNTOF::check_type((arr), &(arr))) + \
sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0]) )
struct Bad_arg_to_COUNTOF {
class Is_pointer; // incomplete
class Is_array {};
template <typename T>
static Is_pointer check_type(const T*, const T* const*);
static Is_array check_type(const void*, const void*);
};
For those who are interested, it works by inserting two "tests" before the standard sizeof-based array-size macro. Those tests don't impact the final calculation, but are designed to generate compile errors for non-array types:
The first test fails unless arr is integral, enum, pointer, or array. reinterpret_cast<const T*> should fail for any other types.
The second test fails for integral, enum, or pointer types.
Integral and enum types will fail because there's no version of check_type that they match, since check_type expects pointers.
Pointer types will fail because they'll match the templated version of check_type, but the return type (Is_pointer) for the templated check_type is incomplete, which will produce an error.
Array types will pass because taking the address of an array of type T
will give you T (*)[], aka a pointer-to-an-array, not a pointer-to-a-pointer. That means that the templated version of check_type won't match. Thanks to SFINAE, the compiler will move on to the non-templated version of check_type, which should accept any pair of pointers. Since the return type for the non-templated version is defined completely, no error will be produced. And since we're not dealing with templates now, local types work fine.
If you are on a Microsoft only platform, you can take advantage of the _countof macro. This is a non-standard extension which will return the count of elements within an array. It's advantage over most countof style macros is that it will cause a compilation error if it's used on a non-array type.
The following works just fine (VS 2008 RTM)
static int ARRAY[5];
enum ENUM{N=_countof(ARRAY)};
But once again, it's MS specific so this may not work for you.
You can't solve it in general, thats one the reasons for array wrappers like boost array (plus stl-style behaviour of course).
It appears not to be possible to obtain the sizeof array as a compile-time constant without a macro with current C++ standard (you need a function to deduce the array size, but function calls are not allowed where you need a compile-time constant). [Edit: But see Minaev's brilliant solution!]
However, your template version isn't typesafe either and suffers from the same problem as the macro: it also accepts pointers and notably arrays decayed to a pointer. When it accepts a pointer, the result of sizeof(T*) / sizeof(T) cannot be meaningful.
Better:
template <typename T, size_t N>
size_t sizeof_array(T (&)[N]){
return N;
}
Without C++0x, the closest I can get is:
#include <iostream>
template <typename T>
struct count_of_type
{
};
template <typename T, unsigned N>
struct count_of_type<T[N]>
{
enum { value = N };
};
template <typename T, unsigned N>
unsigned count_of ( const T (&) [N] )
{
return N;
};
int main ()
{
std::cout << count_of_type<int[20]>::value << std::endl;
std::cout << count_of_type<char[42]>::value << std::endl;
// std::cout << count_of_type<char*>::value << std::endl; // compile error
int foo[1234];
std::cout << count_of(foo) << std::endl;
const char* bar = "wibble";
// std::cout << count_of( bar ) << std::endl; // compile error
enum E1 { N = count_of_type<int[1234]>::value } ;
return 0;
}
which either gives you a function you can pass the variable to, or a template you can pass the type too. You can't use the function for a compile time constant, but most cases you know the type, even if only as template parameter.
Now STL libraries are available to decide/select array size compile time
#include <iostream>
#include <array>
template<class T>
void test(T t)
{
int a[std::tuple_size<T>::value]; // can be used at compile time
std::cout << std::tuple_size<T>::value << '\n';
}
int main()
{
std::array<float, 3> arr;
test(arr);
}
Output:
3