How to partition a parameter pack? - c++

I'd like to write a function template, apply, which receives some function f, an integer i, and a parameter pack. apply needs to unpack the parameters and apply f to them, except for the ith parameter, pi. For pi, it needs to call some other function g before passing it as a parameter to f.
It seems that I need a way to partition the parameter pack into a left side, the ith parameter, and the right side. Is this possible? In code:
template<int i, typename Function, typename... Parms>
void apply(Function f, Parms... parms)
{
auto lhs = // what goes here?
auto pi = // what goes here?
auto rhs = // what goes here?
f(lhs..., g(pi), rhs...);
}

OK, here we go! It really ugly but I couldn't come up with a nicer version in a hurry ;) Most of the stuff is bog standard template specialization. The biggest issue is creating a list of integers of the proper size. I seem to recall that I came up with a nice version but somehow I can't recall what I did. Enjoy!
#include <iostream>
#include <utility>
// printing the values
void print_args() {}
template <typename F> void print_args(F f) { std::cout << f; }
template <typename F, typename... T>
void print_args(F f, T... args)
{
std::cout << f << ", ";
print_args(args...);
}
// the function object to be called:
struct Functor
{
template <typename... T>
void operator()(T... args)
{
std::cout << "f(";
print_args(args...);
std::cout << ")\n";
}
};
// conditionally apply g():
template <typename T> T g(T value) { return 1000 + value; }
template <int i, int j, typename T>
typename std::enable_if<i != j, T>::type forward(T t) { return t; }
template <int i, int j, typename T>
typename std::enable_if<i == j, T>::type forward(T t) { return g(t); }
// create a series of integers:
template <int... Values> struct values {};
template <int Add, typename> struct combine_values;
template <int Add, int... Values>
struct combine_values<Add, values<Values...>>
{
typedef values<Values..., Add> type;
};
template <int Size> struct make_values;
template <> struct make_values<0> { typedef values<> type; };
template <int Size>
struct make_values
{
typedef typename combine_values<Size, typename make_values<Size -1>::type>::type type;
};
// applying f(t...) except for ti where g(ti) is called
template <int i, int... Values, typename Function, typename... T>
void apply_aux(values<Values...>, Function f, T... t)
{
f(forward<i, Values>(t)...);
}
template <int i, typename Function, typename... T>
void apply(Function f, T... t)
{
apply_aux<i>(typename make_values<sizeof...(T)>::type(), f, t...);
}
int main()
{
apply<3>(Functor(), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8);
apply<4>(Functor(), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8);
apply<5>(Functor(), 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8);
}

Iactually did code something similar a little while ago. So try the following code:
template<unsigned N, unsigned M>
struct call_up_impl{
template<class Func, class Mutator, class Tuple, class... Args>
static void do_call(const Func& func, const Mutator& mutator, const Tuple& args, Args&&... unpacked_args) {
call_up_impl<N-1, M>::do_call(func, mutator, args, std::get<N-1>(args), std::forward<Args>(unpacked_args)...);
}
};
template<unsigned M>
struct call_up_impl<0, M> {
template<class Func, class Mutator, class Tuple, class... Args>
static void do_call(const Func& func, const Mutator&, const Tuple&, Args&&... unpacked_args) {
func(std::forward<Args>(unpacked_args)...);
}
};
template<unsigned M>
struct call_up_impl<M, M> {
template<class Func, class Mutator, class Tuple, class... Args>
static void do_call(const Func& func, const Mutator& mutator, const Tuple& args, Args&&... unpacked_args) {
call_up_impl<M-1, M>::do_call(func, mutator, args, mutator(std::get<M-1>(args)), std::forward<Args>(unpacked_args)...);
}
};
template<int i, typename Function, typename... Parms>
void apply(Function f, Parms... parms) {
std::tuple<Parms...> t(parms...);
call_up_impl<std::tuple_size<decltype(t)>::value, i + 1>::do_call(f, &g, t);
}
This is a quick adaption of my original code, so it isn't thoroughly tested and maybe not the not optimal way to do this, but it should work at least (at least according to a quick test and depending what exactly you want). It should be possible to do this without the tuple, but I haven't gotten that to compile with g++ (it doesn't seem to like the nested variadic templates needed). However changing apply to:
template<int i, typename Function, typename... Parms>
void apply(Function f, Parms&&... parms) {
std::tuple<Parms&&...> t(std::forward<Parms>(parms)...);
call_up_impl<std::tuple_size<decltype(t)>::value, i + 1>::do_call(f, &g, t);
}
will probably avoid most of the overhead introduced by the tuple. It would be even better to make correct forwarding of the results of the std::get calls, but I'm too tired to work that out write now.

Related

Deducing Multiple Parameter Packs

Background
I'm trying to write some template functions for a template-only unit test library, specifically for Qt.
Problem
In this library, I have a variadic template that receives a variable amount of objects and functors (Qt5 Signals actually), always paired next to each other, as in QObject, signal, etc... then desirably followed by a variable amount of signal arguments.
Desired Solution
// implementation.h
template <typename T, typename U, typename... Sargs, typename... Fargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain(T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
U* u, void(U::*u_signal)(Fargs...),
Sargs... sargs,
Fargs... fargs) {...}
// client.cpp
test_signal_daisy_chain(object, &Object::signal1,
object, &Object::signal2,
object, &Object::signal3,
1, 2, 3); // where the signals are defined as void(Object::*)(int, int, int)
Where Fargs... corresponds to both the parameters in t_signal and u_signal as well as the arguments to pass to this function for testing, and Sargs... corresponds to a variable amount of QObject and signal member functions (void(T::*)(Fargs...)) to emit for the express purpose of testing.
Unsurprisingly I get "no matching function" due to "template argument deduction/substitution failed", and my ClangCodeModel plugin warns me that 6 arguments were expected, where 8 were given.
Working (ugly) solution
// implementation.h
template <typename... Fargs>
struct wrapper
{
template <typename T, typename U, typename... Sargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain(Fargs... fargs,
T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
U* u, void(U::*u_signal)(Fargs...),
Sargs... sargs) {...}
// client.cpp
wrapper<int, int, int>::test_signal_daisy_chain(1, 2, 3,
object, &Object::signal1,
object, &Object::signal2,
object, &Object::signal3);
I'm not content with having to explicitly define the variable function arguments at both the beginning of the function call and in the wrapper template type parameters. In fact, I was initially surprised that the could not be deduced simply by the fact that they were to match the variable arguments of the functors. I'm open to using wrapper functions as opposed to wrapper classes, as I already have a detail namespace set up which I'm willing to get messy for in order to provide a clean and user-friendly API.
Note: signal arguments can be anywhere from primitives to user-defined types to POD structs to template classes, all of variable length.
Edit 1: c++11 is a hard requirement so you can leave >c++11 features in your answer as long as they have some c++11 workaround, i.e. auto... is easy to fix, auto myFunction = []() constexpr {...}; much less so. If using if constexpr instead of a recursive template <std::size_t> helper function saves space and provides for a more succinct, complete, and future-proof answer, then please opt for whichever standard you deem best.
The simplest approach is to pack the parameters into a tuple at the beginning, and pass the tuple to test_signal_daisy_chain_impl:
template < typename... Fargs,
typename T, typename... Sargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain_impl(const std::tuple<Fargs...> & fargs,
T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
Sargs &&... sargs)
{
// apply unpacks the tuple
std::apply([&](auto ...params)
{
(t->*t_signal)(params...);
}, fargs);
// Although packed into the tuple, the elements in
// the tuple were not removed from the parameter list,
// so we have to ignore a tail of the size of Fargs.
if constexpr (sizeof...(Sargs) > sizeof...(Fargs))
test_signal_daisy_chain_impl(fargs, std::forward<Sargs>(sargs)...);
}
// Get a tuple out of the last I parameters
template <std::size_t I, typename Ret, typename T, typename... Qargs>
Ret get_last_n(T && t, Qargs && ...qargs)
{
static_assert(I <= sizeof...(Qargs) + 1,
"Not enough parameters to pass to the signal function");
if constexpr(sizeof...(Qargs)+1 == I)
return {std::forward<T>(t), std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...};
else
return get_last_n<I, Ret>(std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...);
}
template <typename T, typename... Fargs,
typename... Qargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain(T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
Qargs&&... qargs)
{
static_assert((sizeof...(Qargs) - sizeof...(Fargs)) % 2 == 0,
"Expecting even number of parameters for object-signal pairs");
if constexpr ((sizeof...(Qargs) - sizeof...(Fargs)) % 2 == 0) {
auto fargs = get_last_n<sizeof...(Fargs), std::tuple<Fargs...>>(
std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...);
test_signal_daisy_chain_impl(fargs, t, t_signal,
std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...);
}
}
And the usage:
class Object {
public:
void print_vec(const std::vector<int> & vec)
{
for (auto elem: vec) std::cout << elem << ", ";
}
void signal1(const std::vector<int> & vec)
{
std::cout << "signal1(";
print_vec(vec);
std::cout << ")\n";
}
void signal2(const std::vector<int> & vec)
{
std::cout << "signal2(";
print_vec(vec);
std::cout << ")\n";
}
void signal_int1(int a, int b)
{ std::cout << "signal_int1(" << a << ", " << b << ")\n"; }
void signal_int2(int a, int b)
{ std::cout << "signal_int2(" << a << ", " << b << ")\n"; }
void signal_int3(int a, int b)
{ std::cout << "signal_int3(" << a << ", " << b << ")\n"; }
};
int main()
{
Object object;
test_signal_daisy_chain(&object, &Object::signal1,
&object, &Object::signal2 ,
std::vector{1,2,3});
test_signal_daisy_chain(&object, &Object::signal_int1,
&object, &Object::signal_int2 ,
&object, &Object::signal_int3,
1,2);
}
Edit 1
Since C++11 is a hard constraint, there is a much uglier solution, based on the same principles. Things like std::apply and std::make_index_sequence have to be implemented. Overloading is used instead of if constexpr(....) :
template <std::size_t ...I>
struct indexes
{
using type = indexes;
};
template<std::size_t N, std::size_t ...I>
struct make_indexes
{
using type_aux = typename std::conditional<
(N == sizeof...(I)),
indexes<I...>,
make_indexes<N, I..., sizeof...(I)>>::type;
using type = typename type_aux::type;
};
template <typename Tuple, typename T, typename Method, std::size_t... I>
void apply_method_impl(
Method t_signal, T* t, const Tuple& tup, indexes<I...>)
{
return (t->*t_signal)(std::get<I>(tup)...);
}
template <typename Tuple, typename T, typename Method>
void apply_method(const Tuple & tup, T* t, Method t_signal)
{
apply_method_impl(
t_signal, t, tup,
typename make_indexes<
std::tuple_size<Tuple>::value>::type{});
}
template < typename... Fargs, typename... Sargs>
typename std::enable_if<(sizeof...(Fargs) == sizeof...(Sargs)), void>::type
test_signal_daisy_chain_impl(const std::tuple<Fargs...> & ,
Sargs &&...)
{}
template < typename... Fargs,
typename T, typename... Sargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain_impl(const std::tuple<Fargs...> & fargs,
T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
Sargs &&... sargs)
{
apply_method(fargs, t, t_signal);
// Although packed into the tuple, the elements in
// the tuple were not removed from the parameter list,
// so we have to ignore a tail of the size of Fargs.
test_signal_daisy_chain_impl(fargs, std::forward<Sargs>(sargs)...);
}
// Get a tuple out of the last I parameters
template <std::size_t I, typename Ret, typename T, typename... Qargs>
typename std::enable_if<sizeof...(Qargs)+1 == I, Ret>::type
get_last_n(T && t, Qargs && ...qargs)
{
return Ret{std::forward<T>(t), std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...};
}
template <std::size_t I, typename Ret, typename T, typename... Qargs>
typename std::enable_if<sizeof...(Qargs)+1 != I, Ret>::type
get_last_n(T && , Qargs && ...qargs)
{
static_assert(I <= sizeof...(Qargs) + 1, "Not enough parameters to pass to the singal function");
return get_last_n<I, Ret>(std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...);
}
template <typename T, typename... Fargs,
typename... Qargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain(T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
Qargs&&... qargs)
{
static_assert((sizeof...(Qargs) - sizeof...(Fargs)) % 2 == 0,
"Expecting even number of parameters for object-signal pairs");
auto fargs = get_last_n<sizeof...(Fargs), std::tuple<Fargs...>>(
std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...);
test_signal_daisy_chain_impl(fargs, t, t_signal,
std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...);
}
Edit 2
It is possible to avoid runtime recursion by storing all parameters in a tuple. The following test_signal_daisy_chain_flat() does exactly that, while retaining the same interface as test_signal_daisy_chain():
template <typename Fargs, typename Pairs, std::size_t ...I>
void apply_pairs(Fargs && fargs, Pairs && pairs, const indexes<I...> &)
{
int dummy[] = {
(apply_method(std::forward<Fargs>(fargs),
std::get<I*2>(pairs),
std::get<I*2+1>(pairs)),
0)...
};
(void)dummy;
}
template <typename T, typename... Fargs,
typename... Qargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain_flat(T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
Qargs&&... qargs)
{
static_assert((sizeof...(Qargs) - sizeof...(Fargs)) % 2 == 0,
"Expecting even number of parameters for object-signal pairs");
auto fargs = get_last_n<sizeof...(Fargs), std::tuple<Fargs...>>(
std::forward<Qargs>(qargs)...);
std::tuple<T*, void(T::*)(Fargs...), const Qargs&...> pairs{
t, t_signal, qargs...};
apply_pairs(fargs, pairs,
typename make_indexes<(sizeof...(Qargs) - sizeof...(Fargs))/2>
::type{});
}
Caveats:
Not asserting that parameter pairs match. The compiler simply fails to compile (possibly deep in recursion).
The types of the parameters passed to the function are deduced from the signature of the first function, regardless of the types of the trailing parameters - the trailing parameters are converted to the required types.
All functions are required to have the same signature.
template<class T>
struct tag_t { using type=T; };
template<class Tag>
using type_t = typename Tag::type;
template<class T>
using no_deduction = type_t<tag_t<T>>;
template <typename T, typename U, typename... Sargs, typename... Fargs>
void test_signal_daisy_chain(
T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Sargs...),
U* u, void(U::*u_signal)(Fargs...),
no_deduction<Sargs>... sargs,
no_deduction<Fargs>... fargs)
I assume the Fargs... in t_signal was a typo, and was supposed to be Sargs.
If not, you are in trouble. There is no rule that "earlier deduction beats later deduction".
One thing you can do in c++14 is to have a function returning a function object:
template <typename T, typename U, typename... Fargs>
auto test_signal_daisy_chain(
T* t, void(T::*t_signal)(Fargs...),
U* u, void(U::*u_signal)(Fargs...),
no_deduction<Fargs>... fargs
) {
return [=](auto...sargs) {
// ...
};
}
Then use looks like:
A a; B b;
test_signal_daisy_chain( &a, &A::foo, &b, &B::bar, 1 )('a', 'b', 'c');
doing this in c++11 is possible with a manually written function object.

Compiler cannot handle std::invoke

What is the problem with this?
struct foo {
void process(int, char, bool) {}
};
foo myfoo;
template <typename Method> struct thing {
void doit() {
Method m = Method{};
(myfoo.*m)(5, 'a', true);
}
};
int main() {
thing<decltype(&foo::process)> t;
t.doit();
}
I think this isolates the problem. What is the workaround if I have to use the type Method, as in the case of my original post below?
Original post:
In the following attempted test:
struct Foo { int play (char, bool) {return 3;} };
struct Bar { double jump (int, short, float) {return 5.8;} };
struct Baz { char run (double) {return 'b';} };
int main() {
Foo foo; Bar bar; Baz baz;
Functor<decltype(&Foo::play), decltype(&Bar::jump), decltype(&Baz::run)> func;
func(foo, bar, baz, 'c', true, 5, 2, 4.5, 6.8);
}
As you can predict, func is supposed to carry out
foo.play('c', true); bar.jump(5, 2, 4.5); baz.run(6.8);
My implementation of the Functor class so far (ignoring perfect forwarding and such for now) is
template <typename... Members>
struct Functor {
using m = many_members<Members...>;
template <typename... Args>
typename m::return_types operator()(Args... args) const { // perfect forwarding to do later
auto t = std::make_tuple(args...);
auto objects = utilities::tuple_head<sizeof...(Members)>(t);
auto arguments = utilities::extract_subtuple<sizeof...(Members), sizeof...(Args) - sizeof...(Members)>(t);
call(objects, arguments); // Won't compile on GCC 7.2 or clang 6.0.
}
private:
template <typename Tuple1, typename Tuple2>
auto call (Tuple1& objects, const Tuple2& args) const {
std::invoke(typename utilities::nth_element<0, Members...>::type{}, std::get<0>(objects), 'c', true);
}
};
where my last line using std::invoke is just to test the concept before I continue. It however will not compile on either GCC 7.2 or clang 6.0, so I cannot continue with the generalization. Any workaround here, or a completely different implementation altogether?
Here is everything I have so far:
namespace utilities {
template <std::size_t N, typename... Ts>
struct nth_element : std::tuple_element<N, std::tuple<Ts...>> { };
template <std::size_t Skip, std::size_t Take, typename Tuple>
auto extract_subtuple (const Tuple&, std::enable_if_t<(Take == 0)>* = nullptr) {
return std::tuple<>();
}
template <std::size_t Skip, std::size_t Take, typename Tuple>
auto extract_subtuple (const Tuple& tuple, std::enable_if_t<(Take > 0)>* = nullptr) {
return std::tuple_cat (std::make_tuple(std::get<Skip>(tuple)), extract_subtuple<Skip + 1, Take - 1>(tuple));
}
template <std::size_t N, typename Tuple>
auto tuple_head (const Tuple& tuple) {
return extract_subtuple<0, N>(tuple);
}
}
template <typename Rs, typename Ts, typename ArgsPacks, typename AllArgs, typename... Members> struct many_members_h;
template <typename Rs, typename Ts, typename ArgsPacks, typename AllArgs>
struct many_members_h<Rs, Ts, ArgsPacks, AllArgs> {
using return_types = Rs;
using classes = Ts;
using args_packs = ArgsPacks;
using all_args = AllArgs;
};
template <typename... Rs, typename... Ts, typename... ArgsPacks, typename... AllArgs, typename R, typename T, typename... Args, typename... Rest>
struct many_members_h<std::tuple<Rs...>, std::tuple<Ts...>, std::tuple<ArgsPacks...>, std::tuple<AllArgs...>, R(T::*)(Args...), Rest...> :
many_members_h<std::tuple<Rs..., R>, std::tuple<Ts..., T>, std::tuple<ArgsPacks..., std::tuple<Args...>>, std::tuple<AllArgs..., Args...>, Rest...> { };
template <typename... Members>
struct many_members : many_members_h<std::tuple<>, std::tuple<>, std::tuple<>, std::tuple<>, Members...> { };
template <typename... Members>
struct Functor {
using m = many_members<Members...>;
template <typename... Args>
typename m::return_types operator()(Args... args) const { // perfect forwarding to do later
auto t = std::make_tuple(args...);
auto objects = utilities::tuple_head<sizeof...(Members)>(t);
auto arguments = utilities::extract_subtuple<sizeof...(Members), sizeof...(Args) - sizeof...(Members)>(t);
call(objects, arguments); // Won't compile on GCC 7.2 or clang 6.0.
}
private:
template <typename Tuple1, typename Tuple2>
auto call (Tuple1& objects, const Tuple2& args) const {
std::invoke(typename utilities::nth_element<0, Members...>::type{}, std::get<0>(objects), 'c', true);
}
};
// Testing
#include <iostream>
struct Foo { int play (char, bool) {return 3;} };
struct Bar { double jump (int, short, float) {return 5.8;} };
struct Baz { char run (double) {return 'b';} };
int main() {
Foo foo; Bar bar; Baz baz;
Functor<decltype(&Foo::play), decltype(&Bar::jump), decltype(&Baz::run)> func;
func(foo, bar, baz, 'c', true, 5, 2, 4.5, 6.8);
}
Taking your smaller first example, note that decltype(&foo::process) is the type called void (foo::*)(int, char, bool).
This type does not contain or imply any association with the original function foo::process itself. Just like the type int doesn't let you get the value of some particular int elsewhere in your program, or the type SomeClass doesn't let you refer to a SomeClass object elsewhere in your program, the type alone doesn't carry a value or identity.
The expression Method{} value-initializes this pointer to member type. Which means the resulting value is a null pointer value. Which means calling it is undefined behavior (and on many systems is likely to result in a segfault).
If you're using C++17 mode, you could use a template <auto Method> non-type parameter and simply pass &foo::process (without using decltype) as the template argument. Some SFINAE techniques could enforce that the argument is actually a pointer to member function, and some helper traits could be used to get the class type and parameter list tuple.
Or if you're using a standard earlier than C++17, you'll have to either make the function pointer a function argument, or make it a template parameter which follows the type, as in template <typename MethodType, MethodType Method>, then call as thing<decltype(&foo::process), &foo::process>.
Thanks to aschepler's answer and advice to use auto... instead of typename... for the member function pointers, I was able to carry the original goal:
#include <tuple>
#include <functional> // std::invoke
#include <type_traits>
#include <utility>
namespace utilities {
template <std::size_t N, auto I, auto... Is>
struct nth_element : nth_element<N - 1, Is...> { };
template <auto I, auto... Is>
struct nth_element<0, I, Is...> {
static constexpr decltype(I) value = I;
};
template <std::size_t N, typename Pack> struct nth_index;
template <std::size_t N, std::size_t... Is>
struct nth_index<N, std::index_sequence<Is...>> : nth_element<N, Is...> { };
template <std::size_t Skip, std::size_t Take, typename Tuple>
auto extract_subtuple (const Tuple&, std::enable_if_t<(Take == 0)>* = nullptr) {
return std::tuple<>();
}
template <std::size_t Skip, std::size_t Take, typename Tuple>
auto extract_subtuple (const Tuple& tuple, std::enable_if_t<(Take > 0)>* = nullptr) {
return std::tuple_cat (std::make_tuple(std::get<Skip>(tuple)), extract_subtuple<Skip + 1, Take - 1>(tuple));
}
template <std::size_t N, typename Tuple>
auto tuple_head (const Tuple& tuple) {
return extract_subtuple<0, N>(tuple);
}
template <typename F, typename T, typename Tuple, std::size_t... Is>
decltype(auto) invoke_with_tuple_h (F&& f, T&& t, Tuple&& tuple, std::index_sequence<Is...>&&) {
return std::invoke(std::forward<F>(f), std::forward<T>(t), std::get<Is>(std::forward<Tuple>(tuple))...);
}
template <typename F, typename T, typename Tuple>
decltype(auto) invoke_with_tuple (F&& f, T&& t, Tuple&& tuple) {
return invoke_with_tuple_h (std::forward<F>(f), std::forward<T>(t), std::forward<Tuple>(tuple), std::make_index_sequence<std::tuple_size_v<std::decay_t<Tuple>>>{});
}
template <typename PartialSums, std::size_t Sum, std::size_t... Is> struct all_partial_sums_h;
template <std::size_t... PartialSums, std::size_t Sum>
struct all_partial_sums_h<std::index_sequence<PartialSums...>, Sum> {
using type = std::index_sequence<PartialSums..., Sum>;
using type_without_last_sum = std::index_sequence<PartialSums...>; // We define this because this is what we need actually.
};
template <std::size_t... PartialSums, std::size_t Sum, std::size_t First, std::size_t... Rest>
struct all_partial_sums_h<std::index_sequence<PartialSums...>, Sum, First, Rest...> :
all_partial_sums_h<std::index_sequence<PartialSums..., Sum>, Sum + First, Rest...> { };
template <typename Pack> struct all_partial_sums;
template <std::size_t... Is>
struct all_partial_sums<std::index_sequence<Is...>> : all_partial_sums_h<std::index_sequence<>, 0, Is...> { };
template <typename Pack> struct pack_size;
template <template <typename...> class P, typename... Ts>
struct pack_size<P<Ts...>> : std::integral_constant<std::size_t, sizeof...(Ts)> { };
template <typename PackOfPacks> struct get_pack_sizes;
template <template <typename...> class P, typename... Packs>
struct get_pack_sizes<P<Packs...>> {
using type = std::index_sequence<pack_size<Packs>::value...>;
};
}
template <typename Method> struct method_traits;
template <typename R, typename C, typename... Args>
struct method_traits<R(C::*)(Args...)> {
using return_type = R;
using class_type = C;
using args_type = std::tuple<Args...>;
};
template <typename Rs, typename Cs, typename ArgsPacks, auto... Members> struct many_members_h;
template <typename Rs, typename Cs, typename ArgsPacks>
struct many_members_h<Rs, Cs, ArgsPacks> {
using return_types = Rs;
using classes = Cs;
using args_packs = ArgsPacks;
};
template <typename... Rs, typename... Cs, typename... ArgsPacks, auto F, auto... Rest>
struct many_members_h<std::tuple<Rs...>, std::tuple<Cs...>, std::tuple<ArgsPacks...>, F, Rest...> :
many_members_h<std::tuple<Rs..., typename method_traits<decltype(F)>::return_type>, std::tuple<Cs..., typename method_traits<decltype(F)>::class_type>, std::tuple<ArgsPacks..., typename method_traits<decltype(F)>::args_type>, Rest...> { };
template <auto... Members>
struct many_members : many_members_h<std::tuple<>, std::tuple<>, std::tuple<>, Members...> { };
template <auto... Members>
struct Functor {
using m = many_members<Members...>;
using starting_points = typename utilities::all_partial_sums<typename utilities::get_pack_sizes<typename m::args_packs>::type>::type;
template <typename... Args>
typename m::return_types operator()(Args&&... args) const {
constexpr std::size_t M = sizeof...(Members);
auto t = std::make_tuple(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
auto objects = utilities::tuple_head<M>(t);
auto arguments = utilities::extract_subtuple<M, sizeof...(Args) - M>(t);
return call(objects, arguments, std::make_index_sequence<M>{});
}
private:
template <typename Tuple1, typename Tuple2, std::size_t... Is>
auto call (Tuple1& objects, const Tuple2& args, std::index_sequence<Is...>&&) const { // perfect forwarding to do later
return std::make_tuple(call_helper<Is>(objects, args)...);
}
template <std::size_t N, typename Tuple1, typename Tuple2>
auto call_helper (Tuple1& objects, const Tuple2& args) const { // perfect forwarding to do later
constexpr std::size_t s = std::tuple_size_v<std::tuple_element_t<N, typename m::args_packs>>;;
constexpr std::size_t a = utilities::nth_index<N, starting_points>::value;
const auto args_tuple = utilities::extract_subtuple<a, s>(args);
return utilities::invoke_with_tuple (utilities::nth_element<N, Members...>::value, std::get<N>(objects), args_tuple);
}
};
// Testing
#include <iostream>
struct Foo { int play (char c, bool b) { std::cout << std::boolalpha << "Foo::play(" << c << ", " << b << ") called.\n"; return 3; } };
struct Bar { double jump (int a, short b, float c) { std::cout << "Bar::jump(" << a << ", " << b << ", " << c << ") called.\n"; return 5.8; } };
struct Baz { char run (double d) { std::cout << "Baz::run(" << d << ") called.\n"; return 'b'; } };
int main() {
Foo foo; Bar bar; Baz baz;
Functor<&Foo::play, &Bar::jump, &Baz::run> func;
const auto tuple = func(foo, bar, baz, 'c', true, 5, 2, 4.5, 6.8);
std::cin.get();
}
Output:
Baz::run(6.8) called.
Bar::jump(5, 2, 4.5) called.
Foo::play(c, true) called.

Passing vector items to function-object with unknown number of parameters

Here is a simplified version of what I am trying to achieve:
template <class Func, class Params>
void foo(Func f, Params p) {
f(p[0], p[1], ...) // <-- this is the problem. How to do this?
}
...
foo([](int a, int b){ cout<<(a+b); }, std::vector<int>{1,2});
foo([](char a){ cout<<a; }, std::vector<char>{'a'});
I hope the problem is clear.
EDIT:
The above example did not convey the problem well. I have a vector, populated at some earlier stage, of the parameters. I want a function that will accept a function-object and call it with the parameters from the vector. I can assume that the vector size is equal to the number of parameters.
Hopefully better example:
class C {
std::vector<int> v;
public:
void add_param(int);
... // other functions that manipulate the vector in various ways
template<class Func>
void run(Func f) {
f(v[0], etc...); // <-- problem
}
};
You can use variardic templates:
template <class Func, class... Params>
void foo(Func f, Params... p) {
f(p...);
}
foo([](int a, int b){ cout<<(a+b); }, 1, 2);
foo([](char a){ cout<<a; }, 'a');
You may use something like:
// Minimal traits to have information about function
template <typename Func> struct function_traits;
template <typename Ret, typename ... Ts>
struct function_traits<Ret (Ts...)>
{
constexpr static auto arity = sizeof...(Ts);
};
template <typename Ret, typename ... Ts>
struct function_traits<Ret (*)(Ts...)> : function_traits<Ret(Ts...)> {};
template <typename C, typename Ret, typename ... Ts>
struct function_traits<Ret (C::*)(Ts...) const> : function_traits<Ret(Ts...)> {};
template <typename C>
struct function_traits : function_traits<decltype(&C::operator())> {};
namespace detail
{
template <typename F, typename Vec, std::size_t ... Is>
void call(const F& f, Vec&& v, std::index_sequence<Is...>)
{
f(v[Is]...);
}
}
template <class Func, class Vec>
void foo(const Func& f, Vec&& v) {
detail::call(f,
std::forward<Vec>(v),
std::make_index_sequence<function_traits<Func>::arity>());
}
Demo

Initialize class containing a std::function with a lambda

I created a template class containing a std::function as a member the following way:
template<typename Ret, typename... Args>
class Foo
{
private:
std::function<Ret(Args...)> _func;
public:
Foo(const std::function<Ret(Args...)>& func):
_func(func)
{}
};
In order not to have to specify the arguments and return type of the passed function, I created some make_foo overloads:
template<typename Ret, typename... Args>
auto make_foo(Ret (&func)(Args...))
-> Foo<Ret, Args...>
{
return { std::function<Ret(Args...)>(func) };
}
template<typename Ret, typename... Args>
auto make_foo(const std::function<Ret(Args...)>& func)
-> Foo<Ret, Args...>
{
return { func };
}
However, I was unable to create a make_foo overload that takes a lambda as parameter:
template<typename Ret, typename... Args>
auto make_foo(??? func)
-> Foo<Ret, Args...>
{
return { std::function<Ret(Args...)>(func) };
}
I just can't find a way to have the return type and argument types automatically deduced from the lambda. Is there an idiomatic way to solve such a problem?
Ok, so I thought I would die, but I finally managed to do it ç_ç
First, I used the usual indices. Since I do not have the official ones, I used old indices I wrote some months ago:
template<std::size_t...>
struct indices {};
template<std::size_t N, std::size_t... Ind>
struct make_indices:
make_indices<N-1, N-1, Ind...>
{};
template<std::size_t... Ind>
struct make_indices<0, Ind...>:
indices<Ind...>
{};
Then, I used some function traits found somewhere on StackOverflow. They are nice, and I think that they are equivalent to the Boost library linked in the comments:
template<typename T>
struct function_traits:
function_traits<decltype(&T::operator())>
{};
template<typename C, typename Ret, typename... Args>
struct function_traits<Ret(C::*)(Args...) const>
{
enum { arity = sizeof...(Args) };
using result_type = Ret;
template<std::size_t N>
using arg = typename std::tuple_element<N, std::tuple<Args...>>::type;
};
Then, I was able to write a proper make_foo function and it implementation function, since both are required to use indices. Be careful, it's plain ugly:
template<typename Function, std::size_t... Ind>
auto make_foo_(Function&& func, indices<Ind...>)
-> Foo<
typename function_traits<typename std::remove_reference<Function>::type>::result_type,
typename function_traits<typename std::remove_reference<Function>::type>::template arg<Ind>...>
{
using Ret = typename function_traits<typename std::remove_reference<Function>::type>::result_type;
return { std::function<Ret(typename function_traits<typename std::remove_reference<Function>::type>::template arg<Ind>...)>(func) };
}
template<typename Function, typename Indices=make_indices<function_traits<typename std::remove_reference<Function>::type>::arity>>
auto make_foo(Function&& func)
-> decltype(make_foo_(std::forward<Function>(func), Indices()))
{
return make_foo_(std::forward<Function>(func), Indices());
}
The code is somehow ugly and unreadable, but it definitely works. Hope it does not rely on some implementation-defined behaviour now. Also, thanks all for your advice, it helped! :)
int main()
{
auto lambda = [](int i, float b, long c)
{
return long(i*10+b+c);
};
auto foo = make_foo(lambda);
std::cout << foo(5, 5.0, 2) << std::endl; // 57, it works!
}
And here is the live example :)
I have an example that works with mutable lambdas. I can't quite figure out how to get the CV member qualification right.
First, here's the function template we're after:
#include <functional>
template <typename R, typename ...Args>
void foo(std::function<R(Args...)> f)
{ }
Now we'll let a function template bar take an arbitrary lambda and call the right version of foo, by inspecting the type of the lambda's operator():
#include <type_traits>
template <typename> struct remove_member;
template <typename C, typename T>
struct remove_member<T C::*>
{ using type = T; };
template <typename F>
void bar(F f)
{
using ft = decltype(&F::operator());
foo(std::function<typename remove_member<ft>::type>(f));
}
Example:
int q;
bar([&](int a, int b) mutable -> int { q = a + b; return q / b; });
You can use normal, const lambdas with this modified trait, though I don't like having to spell the function type out:
template <typename C, typename R, typename ...Args>
struct remove_member<R (C::*)(Args...) const>
{ using type = R(Args...); };
I thought it might work with the original code if I use typename std::remove_cv<T>::type, but at least on GCC this doesn't work because of some strange __attribute__((const)) that's set on the lambda's operator type which seems to interfere with the template specialization.

accessing first n variadic function arguments

I have the following code :
template<size_t sz,typename T=float> class Vec{
T v[sz];
Vec(const T& val,const T&... nv){
//how do i assign `sz` number of first arguments into `this->v` array
}
}
I want to create constructor, that receive generic number of constructor argument, and assign the first sz number of arguments into member variable of v
what I want to do, is to be able doing like this: Vec<3> var(1.0,2.0,3.0);
This is possible, but complicated. Here is some code that does it. It may be possible to eliminate the holder type, but I leave that as an exercise for the reader. This has been tested with g++ 4.6.
#include <iostream>
#include <typeinfo>
template<size_t ... Indices> struct indices_holder
{};
template<size_t index_to_add,typename Indices=indices_holder<> >
struct make_indices_impl;
template<size_t index_to_add,size_t...existing_indices>
struct make_indices_impl<index_to_add,indices_holder<existing_indices...> >
{
typedef typename make_indices_impl<
index_to_add-1,
indices_holder<index_to_add-1,existing_indices...> >::type type;
};
template<size_t... existing_indices>
struct make_indices_impl<0,indices_holder<existing_indices...> >
{
typedef indices_holder<existing_indices...> type;
};
template<size_t max_index>
typename make_indices_impl<max_index>::type make_indices()
{
return typename make_indices_impl<max_index>::type();
}
template<unsigned index,typename ... U>
struct select_nth_type;
template<unsigned index,typename T,typename ... U>
struct select_nth_type<index,T,U...>
{
typedef typename select_nth_type<index-1,U...>::type type;
static type&& forward(T&&,U&&... u)
{
return select_nth_type<index-1,U...>::forward(static_cast<U&&>(u)...);
}
};
template<typename T,typename ... U>
struct select_nth_type<0,T,U...>
{
typedef T type;
static type&& forward(T&&t,U&&...)
{
return static_cast<T&&>(t);
}
};
template<unsigned index,typename ... U>
typename select_nth_type<index,U...>::type&& forward_nth(U&&... u)
{
return static_cast<typename select_nth_type<index,U...>::type&&>(
select_nth_type<index,U...>::forward(
static_cast<U&&>(u)...));
}
template<size_t sz,typename T=float> struct Vec{
struct holder
{
T data[sz];
};
holder v;
template<typename ... U>
struct assign_helper
{
template<size_t... Indices>
static holder create_array(indices_holder<Indices...>,Vec* self,U&&... u)
{
holder res={{static_cast<T>(forward_nth<Indices>(u...))...}};
return res;
}
};
template<typename ... U>
Vec(U&&... u):
v(assign_helper<U...>::create_array(make_indices<sz>(),this,static_cast<U&&>(u)...))
{}
};
int main()
{
Vec<3> v(1.2,2.3,3.4,4.5,5.6,7.8);
std::cout<<"v[0]="<<v.v.data[0]<<std::endl;
std::cout<<"v[1]="<<v.v.data[1]<<std::endl;
std::cout<<"v[2]="<<v.v.data[2]<<std::endl;
}
I believe this satisfies all the requirements:
template <size_t sz,typename T,typename... Args> struct Assign;
template <typename T,typename First,typename...Rest>
struct Assign<1,T,First,Rest...> {
static void assign(T *v,const First &first,const Rest&... args)
{
*v = first;
}
};
template <size_t sz,typename T,typename First,typename... Rest>
struct Assign<sz,T,First,Rest...> {
static void assign(T *v,const First &first,const Rest&... rest)
{
*v = first;
Assign<sz-1,T,Rest...>::assign(v+1,rest...);
}
};
template<size_t sz,typename T=float>
struct Vec{
T v[sz];
template <typename... Args>
Vec(const T& val,const Args&... nv){
Assign<sz,T,T,Args...>::assign(v,val,nv...);
}
};
This is another technique which is much simpler if it is ok not to have at least sz parameters:
template<size_t sz,typename T=float>
struct Vec {
T v[sz];
template <typename... Args>
Vec(const T& val,const Args&... nv)
{
T data[] = {val,static_cast<const T &>(nv)...};
int i=0;
for (; i<sz && i<(sizeof data)/sizeof(T); ++i) {
v[i] = data[i];
}
for (; i<sz; ++i) {
v[i] = T();
}
}
};
First declare this utility function:
template <typename T> inline void push(T* p) {}
template <typename T, typename First, typename... Args>
inline void push(T* p, First&& first, Args&&... args)
{
*p = first;
push(++p, std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
Then, in your class:
template<size_t sz,typename T=float>
class Vec
{
T v[sz];
template <typename... Args>
Vec(T first, Args&&... args) // << we have changed const T& to T&&
{
//how do i assign `sz` number of first arguments into `this->v` array
// like this:
push(&v[0], first, std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
}
sz is a template argument, you can directly use it in your code.
The following could work:
template <typename T, std::size_t N>
struct Foo
{
T arr[N];
template <typename ...Args> Foo(Args &&... args) : arr{std::forward<Args>(args)...} { }
};
Usage:
Foo<int, 3> a(1,2,3);
This allows you to construct the array elements from anything that's convertible to T. You can obtain the number of parameters (which can be anything not exceeding N) with sizeof...(Args).
Can you make use of something like this?
template <typename... Args> class Vec {
std :: tuple <Args...> m_args;
Vec (const Foo & a, const Bar & b, Args&&... args)
: m_args (args...)
{
// ... something with a, b
}
};
There are a few rules to constrain you:
you can only have one template... Args-style packed argument list per template class
methods which use it must have the templated arguments on the right-hand-side
You need to unpack the argument pack while keeping a count and do the necessary runtime operation in a functor. This should get you started:
template<unsigned, typename...>
struct unroll;
template<unsigned size, typename Head, typename... Tail>
struct unroll<size, Head, Tail...> {
void operator()(Head&& h, Tail&&... tail) {
// do your stuff, pass necessary arguments through the ctor of the
// struct
unroll<size - 1, Tail...>()(std::forward<Tail>(tail)...);
}
};
template<typename Head, typename... Tail>
struct unroll<1, Head, Tail...> {
void operator()(Head&& h, Tail&&... tail) {
// do your stuff the last time and do not recurse further
}
};
int main()
{
unroll<3, int, double, int>()(1, 3.0, 2);
return 0;
}
The following almost works (and for the last N arguments instead of the first, but hey). Perhaps someone can help with the compile error in the comments below:
#include <iostream>
void foo (int a, int b) {
std :: cout << "3 args: " << a << " " << b << "\n";
}
void foo (int a, int b, int c) {
std :: cout << "3 args: " << a << " " << b << " " << c << "\n";
}
template <int n, typename... Args>
struct CallFooWithout;
template <typename... Args>
struct CallFooWithout <0, Args...> {
static void call (Args... args)
{
foo (args...);
}
};
template <int N, typename T, typename... Args>
struct CallFooWithout <N, T, Args...> {
static void call (T, Args... args)
{
CallFooWithout <N-1, Args...> :: call (args...);
// ambiguous class template instantiation for 'struct CallFooWithout<0, int, int, int>'
// candidates are: struct CallFooWithout<0, Args ...>
// struct CallFooWithout<N, T, Args ...>
}
};
template <int n, typename... Args>
void call_foo_with_last (Args... args)
{
CallFooWithout <sizeof...(Args)-n, Args...> :: call (args...);
}
int main ()
{
call_foo_with_last <2> (101, 102, 103, 104, 105);
call_foo_with_last <3> (101, 102, 103, 104, 105);
}
I don't see why it's ambiguous because 0 is more specialised than N so that should satisfy the partial order ?!?!?
By contrast, the below is fine.
template <int N, typename... T>
struct Factorial
{
enum { value = N * Factorial<N - 1,T...>::value };
};
template <typename... T>
struct Factorial<0, T...>
{
enum { value = 1 };
};
void foo()
{
int x = Factorial<4,int>::value;
}
What's the difference?