将包含initializer_list的参数包扩展到构造函数

发布于 2024-11-04 04:04:22 字数 1602 浏览 1 评论 0原文

我打算在即将到来的项目中大量使用 shared_ptr ,所以(不知道 std::make_shared)我想编写一个可变参数模板函数 spnew< ;T>(...) 作为 shared_ptr 返回 new 的替代品。一切都很顺利,直到我尝试使用其构造函数包含 initializer_list 的类型。当我尝试编译下面的最小示例时,我从 GCC 4.5.2 中得到以下信息:

In function 'int main(int, char**)':
too many arguments to function 'std::shared_ptr spnew(Args ...) [with T = Example, Args = {}]'

In function 'std::shared_ptr spnew(Args ...) [with T = Example, Args = {}]':
no matching function for call to 'Example::Example()'

奇怪的是,如果我用 std::make_shared 替换 spnew,我会得到相同的错误。无论哪种情况,当涉及 initializer_list 时,它似乎都错误地推导了参数,错误地将 Args... 视为空。这是一个例子:

#include <memory>
#include <string>
#include <vector>

struct Example {

    // This constructor plays nice.
    Example(const char* t, const char* c) :
        title(t), contents(1, c) {}

    // This one does not.
    Example(const char* t, std::initializer_list<const char*> c) :
        title(t), contents(c.begin(), c.end()) {}

    std::string title;
    std::vector<std::string> contents;

};

// This ought to be trivial.
template<class T, class... Args>
std::shared_ptr<T> spnew(Args... args) {
    return std::shared_ptr<T>(new T(args...));
}

// And here are the test cases, which don't interfere with one another.
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
    auto succeeds = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar");
    auto fails = spnew<Example>("foo", {"bar"});
}

这只是我的疏忽,还是一个错误?

I intend to use shared_ptr quite a bit in an upcoming project, so (not being aware of std::make_shared) I wanted to write a variadic template function spnew<T>(...) as a shared_ptr-returning stand-in for new. Everything went smoothly till I attempted to make use of a type whose constructor includes an initializer_list. I get the following from GCC 4.5.2 when I try to compile the minimal example below:

In function 'int main(int, char**)':
too many arguments to function 'std::shared_ptr spnew(Args ...) [with T = Example, Args = {}]'

In function 'std::shared_ptr spnew(Args ...) [with T = Example, Args = {}]':
no matching function for call to 'Example::Example()'

Oddly enough, I get equivalent errors if I substitute std::make_shared for spnew. In either case, it seems to be incorrectly deducing the parameters when an initializer_list is involved, erroneously treating Args... as empty. Here's the example:

#include <memory>
#include <string>
#include <vector>

struct Example {

    // This constructor plays nice.
    Example(const char* t, const char* c) :
        title(t), contents(1, c) {}

    // This one does not.
    Example(const char* t, std::initializer_list<const char*> c) :
        title(t), contents(c.begin(), c.end()) {}

    std::string title;
    std::vector<std::string> contents;

};

// This ought to be trivial.
template<class T, class... Args>
std::shared_ptr<T> spnew(Args... args) {
    return std::shared_ptr<T>(new T(args...));
}

// And here are the test cases, which don't interfere with one another.
int main(int argc, char** argv) {
    auto succeeds = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar");
    auto fails = spnew<Example>("foo", {"bar"});
}

Is this just an oversight on my part, or a bug?

如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。

扫码二维码加入Web技术交流群

发布评论

需要 登录 才能够评论, 你可以免费 注册 一个本站的账号。

评论(2

烟织青萝梦 2024-11-11 04:04:22

你可以这样做 -

#include <memory>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>

struct Example {

    template<class... Args>
    Example(const char* t, Args... tail) : title(t) 
    {
        Build(tail...);
    }

    template<class T, class... Args>
    void Build(T head, Args... tail) 
    { 
        contents.push_back(std::string(head)); 
        Build(tail...);
    }

    template<class T>
    void Build(T head)
    { 
        contents.push_back(std::string(head)); 
    }

    void Build() {}        

    std::string title;
    std::vector<std::string> contents;

};

template<class T, class... Args>
std::shared_ptr<T> spnew(Args... args) {
    return std::shared_ptr<T>(new T(args...));
}

int main(int argc, char** argv) {
    auto succeeds = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar");
    auto fails = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar", "poo", "doo");

    std::cout << "succeeds->contents contains..." << std::endl;
    for ( auto s : succeeds->contents ) std::cout << s << std::endl;

    std::cout << std::endl << "fails->contents contains..." << std::endl;
    for ( auto s : fails->contents ) std::cout << s << std::endl;
}

尽管通用模板是类型安全的,因为编译器会抱怨
如果传递的类型不可转换为 const char *,则为 contents.push_back

如上所述,您的代码在 gcc 4.6 上运行良好,但是您收到的警告在此处进行了解释
为什么-doesnt-my-template-accept-an-initializer-list< /a>,并且可能不是标准
兼容,尽管 c++0x 标准尚未发布,因此这可能会改变。

You could do this -

#include <memory>
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>

struct Example {

    template<class... Args>
    Example(const char* t, Args... tail) : title(t) 
    {
        Build(tail...);
    }

    template<class T, class... Args>
    void Build(T head, Args... tail) 
    { 
        contents.push_back(std::string(head)); 
        Build(tail...);
    }

    template<class T>
    void Build(T head)
    { 
        contents.push_back(std::string(head)); 
    }

    void Build() {}        

    std::string title;
    std::vector<std::string> contents;

};

template<class T, class... Args>
std::shared_ptr<T> spnew(Args... args) {
    return std::shared_ptr<T>(new T(args...));
}

int main(int argc, char** argv) {
    auto succeeds = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar");
    auto fails = spnew<Example>("foo", "bar", "poo", "doo");

    std::cout << "succeeds->contents contains..." << std::endl;
    for ( auto s : succeeds->contents ) std::cout << s << std::endl;

    std::cout << std::endl << "fails->contents contains..." << std::endl;
    for ( auto s : fails->contents ) std::cout << s << std::endl;
}

This, despite the generic templates is type safe as the compiler will complain about
the contents.push_back if the passed type is not convertible to a const char *.

As described above, your code was working fine with gcc 4.6 however the warning you get is explained here
why-doesnt-my-template-accept-an-initializer-list, and is possibly not standards
compliant, although the c++0x standard is yet to be published so this could change.

Oo萌小芽oO 2024-11-11 04:04:22

使用带有警告的 g​​cc-4.7(可能也适用于 gcc-4.6,只是分支):

foo.cpp: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:
foo.cpp:29:47: warning: deducing ‘Args ...’ as ‘std::initializer_list<const 
char*>’ [enabled by default]
foo.cpp:22:20: warning:   in call to ‘std::shared_ptr<_Tp1> spnew(Args ...) 
[with T = Example, Args = {const char*, std::initializer_list<const 
char*>}]’ [enabled by default]
foo.cpp:29:47: warning:   (you can disable this with -fno-deduce-init-list) 
[enabled by default]

我不确定为什么有人会想要抱怨 init-list 推导。

有一个相关的线程:
为什么我的模板不接受初始化列表

基本上,裸露的初始化列表没有类型。

With gcc-4.7 (probably would work on gcc-4.6 too, just branched) with warnings:

foo.cpp: In function ‘int main(int, char**)’:
foo.cpp:29:47: warning: deducing ‘Args ...’ as ‘std::initializer_list<const 
char*>’ [enabled by default]
foo.cpp:22:20: warning:   in call to ‘std::shared_ptr<_Tp1> spnew(Args ...) 
[with T = Example, Args = {const char*, std::initializer_list<const 
char*>}]’ [enabled by default]
foo.cpp:29:47: warning:   (you can disable this with -fno-deduce-init-list) 
[enabled by default]

I'm not sure why anyone would want to beef about init-list deduction though.

There is a related thread:
Why doesn't my template accept an initializer list

Basically, a bare init-list doesn't have a type.

~没有更多了~
我们使用 Cookies 和其他技术来定制您的体验包括您的登录状态等。通过阅读我们的 隐私政策 了解更多相关信息。 单击 接受 或继续使用网站,即表示您同意使用 Cookies 和您的相关数据。
原文