Can I get the C++ preprocessor to send output during compilation? - c++

I have been debugging a particularly insidious bug which I now believe to be caused by unexpected changes which stem from different behavior when different headers are included (or not).
This is not exactly the structure of my code but let's just take a look at this scenario:
#include "Newly_created_header_which_accidentally_undefines_SOME_DEFINE.h"
// ...
#ifdef SOME_DEFINE
code_which_i_believe_i_am_always_running();
#else
code_which_fails_which_i_have_forgotten_about(); // runtime error stack traces back here, but I don't know this... or maybe it's some strange linker error
#endif
I search through my git commits and narrow down the cause of the bug, compiling and running my code countless times, only to find after several hours that the only difference required for causing the bug is the inclusion of what appears to be a completely benign and unrelated header.
Perhaps this is a great argument for why the preprocessor basically just sucks.
But I like it. The preprocessor is cool because it lets us make shortcuts. It's only that some of these shortcuts, when not used carefully, bite us in the butt pretty hard.
So at this juncture it would have helped if I could use a directive like #echo "Running old crashy code" where I'll be able to see this during compilation so I could be tipped off immediately to start investigating why SOME_DEFINE was not defined.
As far as I know the straightforward way of determining if SOME_DEFINE is defined is to do something like
#ifndef SOME_DEFINE
printf("SOME_DEFINE not defined!!\n");
This will surely get the job done but there is no good reason for this task to be performed at runtime because it is entirely determined at compile-time. This is simply something I'd like to see at compile-time.
That being said, in this situation, using the print (or log or even throwing an exception) may be an acceptable thing to do because I won't really care about slowing down or cluttering up the questionable code. But that doesn't apply if I have for instance two code paths both of which are important, and I just want to know at compile-time which one is being activated. I'd have to worry about running the code that does the preprocessor-conditioned print at the beginning of the program.
This is really just a long-winded way of asking the question, "Can I echo a string to the output during compilation by using a preprocessor directive?"

If you use the #error directive, the output will be printed directly and the compilation will stop:
$ make days_in_month
cc days_in_month.c -o days_in_month
days_in_month.c:2:2: error: #error "ugly!"
make: *** [days_in_month] Error 1
$
This might not be quite what you wanted, but it gets the job done quickly.
$ cat days_in_month.c
#include <stdio.h>
#error "ugly!"
...
If you wish processing to continue, you can use #warning:
$ make days_in_month
cc days_in_month.c -o days_in_month
days_in_month.c:2:2: warning: #warning "ugly!" [-Wcpp]
$ head days_in_month.c
#include <stdio.h>
#warning "ugly!"

Answer more in line with what I was looking for is here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/3826876/340947
Sorry #sarnold

Related

C/C++ preprocessor directive for handing compilation errors

The title might be somewhat confusing, so I'll try to explain.
Is there a preprocessor directive that I can encapsulate a piece of code with, so that if this piece of code contains a compilation error, then some other piece of should be compiled instead?
Here is an example to illustrate my motivation:
#compile_if_ok
int a = 5;
a += 6;
int b = 7;
b += 8;
#else
int a = 5;
int b = 7;
a += 6;
b += 8;
#endif
The above example is not the problem I am dealing with, so please do not suggest specific solutions.
UPDATE:
Thank you for all the negative comments down there.
Here is the exact problem, perhaps someone with a little less negative approach will have an answer:
I'm trying to decide during compile-time whether some variable a is an array or a pointer.
I've figured I can use the fact that, unlike pointers, an array doesn't have an L-value.
So in essence, the following code would yield a compilation error for an array but not for a pointer:
int a[10];
a = (int*)5;
Can I somehow "leverage" this compilation error in order to determine that a is an array and not a pointer, without stopping the compilation process?
Thanks
No.
It's not uncommon for large C++ (and other-language) projects to have a "configuration" stage designed into their build system to attempt compilation of different snippets of code, generating a set of preprocessor definitions indicating which ones worked, so that the compilation of the project proper can then use the preprocessor definitions in #ifdef/#else/#endif statements to select between alternatives. For many UNIX/Linux software packages, running the "./configure" script coordinates this. You can read about the autoconf tool that helps create such scripts at http://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/
This is not supported in standard C. However, many command shells make this fairly simple. For example, in bash, you can write a script such as:
#!/bin/bash
# Try to compile the program with Code0 defined.
if cc -o program -DCode0= "$*"; then
# That worked, do nothing extra. (Need some command here due to bash syntax.)
/bin/true
else
# The first compilation failed, try without Code0 defined.
cc -o program "$*"
fi
./program
Then your source code can test whether Code0 is defined:
#if defined Code0
foo bar;
#else
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
printf("Hello, world.\n");
return 0;
}
#endif
However, there are usually better ways to, in effect, make source code responsive to the environment or the target platform.
On the updated question :
If you're writing C++, use templates...
Specifically, to test the type of a variable you have helpers : std::enable_if, std::is_same, std::is_pointer, etc
See the type support module : http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/types
C11 _Generic macros might be able to handle this. If not, though, you're screwed in C.
Not in the C++ preprocessor. In C++ you can easily use overload resolution or a template or even expression SFINAE or anything like that to execute a different function depending on if a is an array or not. That is still occurring after preprocessing though.
If you need one that is both valid C and valid C++, the best you can do is #ifdef __cplusplus and handle it that way. Their common subset (which is mostly C89) definitely does not have something that can handle this at any stage of compilation.

c++ file will not compile with a certain #include while all others do

I have a c++ file that keeps throwing errors about four files up the chain, while every other file using that #include compiles fine.
It keeps giving me this kind of stuff. I am certain the include file is fine as 1. All of the others which use this same file compile fine and 2. I looked at the file, and it is fine.
/usr/include/opal/opal/mediafmt.h:305:9: error: expected identifier before numeric constant
/usr/include/opal/opal/mediafmt.h:305:9: error: expected ‘}’ before numeric constant
/usr/include/opal/opal/mediafmt.h:305:9: error: expected unqualified-id before numeric constant
/usr/include/opal/opal/mediafmt.h:308:14: error: bit-field ‘mode’ with non-integral type
It's odd because it throws the error about 5 files up the chain:
In file included from /usr/include/opal/opal/connection.h:44:0,
from /usr/include/opal/opal/call.h:41,
from /usr/include/opal/opal/manager.h:42,
from /usr/include/opal/opal/endpoint.h:41,
from /usr/include/opal/opal/localep.h:41,
from /home/jonathan/workspace/HHPVideoServer/opal/GstEndPoint.h:12,
from /home/jonathan/workspace/HHPVideoServer/opal/opal-call-manager.h:42,
from ../gui/HHPVideoCodecGui.cc:3:
I checked to make sure I wasn't screwing up any #define s but that was the only idea I had. Is there a good approach someone can offer me on how to track this error down?
Here is the file:
http://www.opalvoip.org/docs/opal-v3_9/da/d60/mediafmt_8h-source.html
Update
Here is the struct with the troublesome line from the preprocessor. I suppose the "0L" is the trouble.
struct H245GenericInfo {
H245GenericInfo() { memset(this, 0, sizeof(*this)); }
unsigned ordinal:16;
enum Modes {
0L,
Collapsing,
NonCollapsing
} mode:3;
enum IntegerTypes {
UnsignedInt,
Unsigned32,
BooleanArray
} integerType:3;
bool excludeTCS:1;
bool excludeOLC:1;
bool excludeReqMode:1;
};
then
#define None 0L
from "/usr/include/X11/X.h" causes 0L to be substituted for None in the Modes enumeration at line 305.
from the X11 lib. The reason the other files were compiling is that they weren't also using Gtk. Does any one have a work around that doesn't involve me rewriting either of the lib files?
solution
I just put the offending #include above everything else. Thanks for the help everyone.
Assuming you're using gcc, run gcc -E your-file.c > tmpfile. This runs just the preprocessor. The output is going to be quite voluminous, but it should help you track down the problem.
What does line 305 look like?
EDIT:
Given your update, yes, the problem is that "None" is being defined as a macro before your mediafmt.h tries to define it as an enumerator. Can you add #undef None after including X.h and before including mediafmt.h? (If so, be sure to comment it.)
EDIT2: Rearranging the #include directives might be a better solution -- but again, be sure to add a comment explaining the reason.
Because you said that this include works from other files, I'm guessing that the order of your #includes may be different in the failing file. Try moving the #include for opal-call-manager.h to the top of the file.
Ideally, you would follow the answers others have posted to track down the root cause, but simply reordering the #includes may be a quick solution and will help narrow down what is conflicting.
Since you found 0L in place of None it's likely you have #define None 0L somewhere in your include chain. Either reorder the includes, like Klox suggested, so this definition happens after mediafmt.h is included, or try and convert, undefine, or fix the offending None definition elsewhere.

Any utility to test expand C/C++ #define macros?

It seems I often spend way too much time trying to get a #define macro to do exactly what i want. I'll post my current dilemma below and any help is appreciated. But really the bigger question is whether there is any utility someone could recommend, to quickly display what a macro is actually doing? It seems like even the slow trial and error process would go much faster if I could see what is wrong.
Currently, I'm dynamically loading a long list of functions from a DLL I made. The way I've set things up, the function pointers have the same nanes as the exported functions, and the typedef(s) used to prototype them have the same names, but with a prepended underscore. So I want to use a define to simplify assignments of a long long list of function pointers.
For example, In the code statement below, 'hexdump' is the name of a typedef'd function point, and is also the name of the function, while _hexdump is the name of the typedef. If GetProcAddress() fails, a failure counter in incremented.
if (!(hexdump = (_hexdump)GetProcAddress(h, "hexdump"))) --iFail;
So let's say I'd like to replace each line like the above with a macro, like this...
GETADDR_FOR(hexdump )
Well this is the best I've come up with so far. It doesn't work (my // comment is just to prevent text formatting in the message)...
// #define GETADDR_FOR(a) if (!(a = (#_#a)GetProcAddress(h, "/""#a"/""))) --iFail;
And again, while I'd APPRECIATE an insight into what silly mistake I've made, it would make my day to have a utility that would show me the error of my ways, by simply plugging in my macro.
Go to https://godbolt.org/. Enter your code in the left pane and select compiler as gcc put the argument as -E in the right pane. Your pre-processed code will appear on the right.
You can just run your code through the preprocessor, which will show you what it will be expanded into (or spit out errors as necessary):
$ cat a.c
#define GETADDR_FOR(a) if (!(a = (#_#a)GetProcAddress(h, "/""#a"/"")))
GETADDR_FOR(hexdump)
$ gcc -E a.c
# 1 "a.c"
# 1 "<built-in>"
# 1 "<command-line>"
# 1 "a.c"
a.c:1:36: error: '#' is not followed by a macro parameter
GETADDR_FOR(hexdump)
In GCC, it's gcc -E foo.c to only preprocess the file.
Visual Studio uses the /P argument.
http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/59a2438f-ba4a-4945-a407-a1a295598088 - visual studio plugin to expand macroses
You appear to be confused about what the exact syntax is for stringifying or token pasting in C preprocessor macros.
You might find this page about C preprocessor macros in general helpful.
In particular, I think this macro should read like this:
#define GETADDR_FOR(a) if (!(a = (_##a)GetProcAddress(h, #a))) --iFail
The trailing ; should be skipped because you will likely be typing this as GETADDR_FOR(hexdump);, and if you don't it will look very strange in your C code and confuse many syntax highlighters.
And as someone else mentioned gcc -E will run the preprocessor and skip the other compilation steps. This is useful for debugging preprocessor problems.
You might want to take a look at Boost Wave. Like most of Boost, it's really more a library than a utility, but it does have a driver to act as a complete preprocessor.

C++ conditional compilation

I have the following code snippet:
#ifdef DO_LOG
#define log(p) record(p)
#else
#define log(p)
#endif
void record(char *data){
.....
.....
}
Now if I call log("hello world") in my code and DO_LOG isn't defined, will the line be compiled, in other words will it eat up the memory for the string "hello world"?
P.S. There are a lot of record calls in the program and it is memory sensitive, so is there any other way to conditionally compile so that it only depends on the #define DO_LOG?
This should be trivial to verify for yourself by inspecting the resulting binary.
I would say "no", since the expression totally goes away, the compiler will never see the string (it's removed by the preprocessor's macro expansion).
Since the preprocessor runs before the compiler, the line will not even exist when the compiler runs. So the answer is no, it does not use any memory at all.
No, it will not be in the binary. It will not even be compiled - the preprocessor will expand it into an empty string prior to the compilation, so the compiler will not even see it.
No. The preprocessor is executed prior to compilation, and so the code will never even be seen. I would like to add, though, that if you are interested in adding logging to your C++ application, you might want to use the Log4Cxx library. It uses similar macros which you can completely elide from your application, but when logging is enabled, it supports several different levels of logging (based on importance/severity) as well as multiple different "appenders" to which to send logging output (e.g. syslog, console, files, network I/O, etc.).
The full API documentation may be found at Log4Cxx API docs. Also, if you have any Java developers on board who have used Log4J, they should feel right at home with Log4Cxx (and convince you to use it).

Declaring the Unix flavour in C/C++

How do I declare in C/C++ that the code that is written is to be built in either HP-UX or Solaris or AIX?
I found that, a good way to figure this king of question, is, at least with gcc, to have this makefile:
defs:
g++ -E -dM - < /dev/null
then, :
$ make defs
should output all the definitions you have available.
So:
$ make defs | grep -i AIX
$ make defs | grep -i HP
should give you the answer. Example for Linux:
$ make defs | grep -i LINUX
#define __linux 1
#define __linux__ 1
#define __gnu_linux__ 1
#define linux 1
Once you found the define you are looking for, you type at the beginning of your code:
#if !(defined(HP_DEFINE) || defined(AIX_DEFINE) || defined(SOLARIS_DEFINE))
# error This file cannot be compiled for your plateform
#endif
How about a macro passed to the compiler ?
i.e. gcc -Dmacro[=defn]
Then test for the macro in your code with a simple #ifdef of #if (if you've given it a value). There may already be a predefined macro for your target platform as well.
[EDIT: Put some of my comments here in my answer that explain how -D works]
-Dmacro[=defn] on the command line for the compiler is the same as having #define macro defn in the code. You expand it out like this: -Dfoo=bar is equivalent to #define foo bar. Also, the definition is optional so -Dfoo is equivalent to #define foo.
Be careful about how you handle this. You should identify the features of the O/S that you want to use by feature, not by O/S, and write your code accordingly. Then, in one header, you can identify which of the features are available on the O/S that you are compiling on. This is the technique used by autoconf, and even if you do not use autoconf itself, the technique it espouses is better than the platform-based technique. Remember, the features found on one O/S often migrate and become available on others too, so if you work by features, you can adapt to the future more easily than if you work solely on the O/S.
You also have to write your code appropriately, and portably. Isolate the O/S dependencies in separate files whenever possible, and code to an abstract O/S interface that does what you need. Taken to an extreme, you end up with a Java JVM; you don't need to go that far, but you can obviate most of the problems.
Take a look at portable libraries like the Apache Portable Runtime (APR) library.
And write your code along the lines of:
#ifdef HAVE_PWRITE
...code using pread() and pwrite()...
#else
...code using plain old read() and write()...
#endif
This is a grossly over-simplified example - there could be a number of fallbacks before you use plain read() and write(). Nevertheless, this is the concept used in the most portable code - things like GCC and Apache and so on.
Perhaps a less convoluted solution that some of those suggested is to consult Pre-defined C/C++ Compiler Macros. This site provides an extensive list of compiler macros for a large number of compiler/OS/Architecture combinations.