Can you make a C++ generic function? [duplicate] - c++

Question

This question already has answers here:
Is there a way to pass auto as an argument in C++?
(4 answers)
auto parameter type in functions
(1 answer)
Closed 4 months ago.
Is it possible to create a generic C++ function foo?
foo(Object bar, Object fred)
{
//code
}
in which that if the two objects are recognized, they are compared and a comparison value is returned otherwise some other value is returned to indicate a comparison was not possible?
I ask in the case of genericizing a sorting class, in which case you can use this method, and when you derive new objects you want to sort, you add to this foo function, a method on which to sort the new type of Object.

Answer 1

Using templates, define two versions of the function, one where the parameters are the same type and one where they can be different:
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
template<typename Type>
void func(Type, Type)
{
cout << "same" << endl;
}
template<typename TypeA, typename TypeO>
void func(TypeA, TypeO)
{
cout << "different" << endl;
}
int main()
{
func(5, 3); // same
func(5, 3.0); // different
func(string("hello"), "hello"); // different
func(5.0, 3.0); // same
return 0;
}
Output:
same
different
different
same

Answer 2

I think you are in dire need of Templates!
You can write a template function and then write a specialization for the said types to do something specific if the need be.

Answer 3

template<class Type1, class Type2>
void foo(Type1 t1, Type2 t2)
{
// put code here for function
}
call as
foo<std::string, int> ("hello", 10);

Answer 4

Most probably you need to use templates as other people suggest:
template <class T>
return_type func(T const& l, T const& r)
{
...
}
Because you normally want compilation to fail when the operation implemented by a generic function does not make sense for particular types, so you would either use conditional definition (in the below example is_arithmetic):
#include <boost/utility/enable_if.hpp>
#include <boost/type_traits/is_arithmetic.hpp>
template <class T>
typename boost::enable_if<boost::is_arithmetic<T>, return_type>::type
func(T const& l, T const& r)
{
...
}
or static assertion in the code to yield the same result:
#include <boost/type_traits/is_arithmetic.hpp>
template <class T>
return_type func(T const& l, T const& r)
{
static_assert(boost::is_arithmetic<T>::type::value, "incompatible types");
...
}

Answer 5

I'm going to stick my neck out here and say you don't need Templates to do this. I'm not saying don't use them, but just that depending on exactly what you're wanting to do, there are alternatives.
What it sounds like you want is the ability to compare two generic objects provided that they adhere to a common set of ground rules. You could actually implement this using traditional inheritance or using templates. The choice of which you want comes down to how flexible you need it to be and whether you want some of the decisions to be made at runtime or compile time. If the latter - i.e. you want to pick up on casting errors etc., - then go for templates.
Either way, your objects will either have to adhere to some basic groundrules for how you compare them and preferably encapsulate that - this way your comparitor would be generic. or you'd have to write different comparitors for each object comparison. While it sounds like the latter is what you want, be wary of letting too much of your class implementation leach out into the comparitor function and thereby breaking encapsulation.
From my own experience, going straight to the template approach can occasionally result in a lot of bloated, messed up code which is hard to read, debug and maintain. Take a hard look at you design and what you actually need first.

Answer 6

OP seems to want to know if the 2 objects are comparable or not. You can use template specialization to achieve this (note: this doesn't compile on VC 10, but does on g++ 4.7). The only nuance, is you want this function to
they are compared and a comparison value is returned otherwise some other value is returned to indicate a comparison was not possible
But you need to define some sort of structure to signify that a comparison was not possible; using a magic number '-500' or whatever is not good style. Alternately, you could throw an error, and allow it to be caught an handled.
struct NoCompare{};
template <typename U1, typename U2>
static auto compare2(const U1 & u1, const U2 & u2) -> decltype(u1 == u2)
{
cout << "Comparable" << endl;
return u1 == u2;
}
static int compare2(...)
{
// Comparison not supported - return whatever value you want. (change the return type as appropriate)
cout << "Not comparable" << endl;
return -500;
}
int main()
{
int a = 5, b = 3, c = 3;
NoCompare dns;
cout << compare2(a, b) << endl;
cout << compare2(dns, b) << endl;
cout << compare2(c, b) << endl;
return 0;
}
Output:
C:\MinGW\MinGW>a
Comparable
0
Not comparable
-500
Comparable
1

Answer 7

It seems that you are referring to Common Lisp / CLOS -style generic functions which do multiple dynamic dispatch. C++ does single dynamic dispatch with methods but only single static dispatch with functions. So the answer is no. C++ doesn't support this at the moment. There have been proposals along the years to add it into the language but that hasn't happened yet.