Generating function declaration using a macro iteration
I'm trying to generate a function declaration using a macro
/* goal: generate int f(int a, float b) */
template<typename P>
struct ptype;
template<typename P>
struct ptype<void(P)> { typedef P type; };
#define NAMEe
#define COMMAe
#define COMMA ,
#define NAME(N) N PARAMS
#define PARAMS(P, ...) COMMA ## __VA_ARGS__ P NAME ## __VA_ARGS__
#define PARAM_ITER(P) P NAME
#define PROTO(R, N, P) \
ptype<void R>::type N (PARAM_ITER P (,e))
PROTO((int), f, (int)(a)(float)(b开发者_StackOverflow));
It will iteratively process the next (name)
or (type)
by NAME
or PARAMS
respectively, with the ...
having an empty macro argument. But GCC complains with
prototype.hpp:20:35: warning: ISO C99 requires rest arguments to be used
And clang complains with
ptype<void (int)>::type f (int aprototype.hpp:20:1: warning: varargs argument missing, but tolerated as an extension [-pedantic]
I think this happens because of the following
#define FOO(X, ...)
FOO(A);
Because I'm not passing an argument for the ...
or each of those (name)
or (type)
. Is there any simple work around I can apply?
I've now used a technique similar to the technique used by @James to find the length of a parameter list. If as second argument, instead of O
, ONT
is passed, I will print the comma and NAME
. The following is the final solution:
/* goal: generate void f(int a, float b) */
template<typename P>
struct ptype;
template<typename P>
struct ptype<void(P)> { typedef P type; };
#define TYPE_DO(X) X
#define TYPE_DONT(X)
#define TYPE_MAYBE(X, A, ...) TYPE_D ## A (X)
#define COMMA_DO ,
#define COMMA_DONT
#define COMMA_MAYBE(A, B, ...) COMMA_D ## B
#define NAME_DO NAME
#define NAME_DONT
#define NAME_MAYBE(A, B, ...) NAME_D ## B
#define NAME(N) N PARAMS
#define PARAMS(...) COMMA_MAYBE(__VA_ARGS__,O,O) TYPE_MAYBE(__VA_ARGS__,O,O) \
NAME_MAYBE(__VA_ARGS__,O,O)
#define PARAM_ITER(P) P NAME
#define PROTO(R, N, P) \
ptype<void R>::type N (PARAM_ITER P (D,ONT))
Test:
#define STR1(X) #X
#define STR(X) STR1(X)
int main() {
// prints correctly
std::cout << STR(PROTO((int), f, (int)(a)(float)(b)));
}
To solve the "FOO
" problem, you can select different macros depending on the arity of the variable arguments pack. Here's a first shot at that:
// These need to be updated to handle more than three arguments:
#define PP_HAS_ARGS_IMPL2(_1, _2, _3, N, ...) N
#define PP_HAS_ARGS_SOURCE() MULTI, MULTI, ONE, ERROR
#define PP_HAS_ARGS_IMPL(...) PP_HAS_ARGS_IMPL2(__VA_ARGS__)
#define PP_HAS_ARGS(...) PP_HAS_ARGS_IMPL(__VA_ARGS__, PP_HAS_ARGS_SOURCE())
#define FOO_ONE(x) ONE_ARG: x
#define FOO_MULTI(...) MULTI_ARG: __VA_ARGS__
#define FOO_DISAMBIGUATE2(has_args, ...) FOO_ ## has_args (__VA_ARGS__)
#define FOO_DISAMBIGUATE(has_args, ...) FOO_DISAMBIGUATE2(has_args, __VA_ARGS__)
#define FOO(...) FOO_DISAMBIGUATE(PP_HAS_ARGS(__VA_ARGS__), __VA_ARGS__)
Usage example:
FOO(1) // replaced by ONE_ARG: 1
FOO(1, 2) // replaced by MULTI_ARG: 1, 2
(I'll try to revisit this to clean it up; I think there are definitely some unneccessary macros in there. I haven't had a chance to look into the broader problem that you describe, so I'm not sure if this solves that too. There may be a simpler way to solve that problem, too... I'm not particularly familiar with variadic macros. This preprocesses cleanly on mcpp.)
P99 has a macro that does exactly what you want, I think, namely P99_PROTOTYPE
. It has a "signature" of
P99_PROTOTYPE(RT, NAME [, AT]*)
where RT
is the return type (may be void
) and AT
are the argument types. The list of argument types may be empty, in which case it is substituted by void
.
Beware that P99 is made for C99 and not for C++. You'll encounter particular difficulties if your arguments contain commas. C++'s syntax abuse of tokens <
and >
as bracketing expressions for templates is particularly bad for the preprocessor. C-preprocessor and C++ are basically incompatible languages on the syntax level.
P99 gets away from the difficulties that you are facing by detecting the number of arguments that the macro receives on a call and reacts differently on the border cases.
精彩评论