function_traits | A library of type traits for introspecting C function
kandi X-RAY | function_traits Summary
kandi X-RAY | function_traits Summary
A library of type traits for introspecting C++ function types
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of function_traits
function_traits Key Features
function_traits Examples and Code Snippets
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on function_traits
QUESTION
I've got the following code for function traits:
...ANSWER
Answered 2020-Jun-23 at 09:25A set of overloads is not a type. You cannot decltype
operator*
when it is overloaded, because you have to pick one overload first. This can be done via static_cast
as already has been suggested in a comment.
This answer explains an extremely useful idiom to check properties of types. For the sake of completeness I include the code here:
QUESTION
The abominable function types combinatory can be a real pain when dealing with template based on function type matching (see std::is_function).
Miscellaneous qualifers including const, volatile, &, &&, noexcept (plus the variadic arguments support) may lead to a large number of template specializations.
However, the noexcept
specifier allows to use a boolean expression noexcept(expr)
:
noexcept
being equivalent tonoexcept(true)
as default
So, in a future, can we imagine to uniformize all qualifers with this model:
const
qualifier will be equivavent toconst(true)
volatile
qualifier will be equivavent tovolatile(true)
&
qualifier will be equivavent to&(true)
&&
qualifier will be equivavent to&&(true)
And, the icing on the cake, make qualifiers deductible to be able to write something like:
...ANSWER
Answered 2020-Feb-11 at 17:37I made a similar suggestion on the std-proposals mailing list previously. See threads here and here.
The conclusion from this discussion was that adding such a feature to the language would be a lot of work. Not only would it be necessary to add rules to the language for deducing the boolean arguments to the qualifiers, but there would also be many other issues such as the point at which the qualifiers are instantiated and evaluated. A proposal of this size would also be likely to introduce many other issues that would have to be hammered out.
Gašper Ažman appeared to believe that some form of "computed deduction" would be an alternative solution to the problem that would be more feasible. If you're interested in helping with this effort then I would suggest contacting him.
QUESTION
I'm using the solution proposed in this answer to get the arguments from a lambda function and it's working fine when the number of parameters is fixed. I first created a variant with one argument and would like to add a second one which accepts two arguments. I'm not looking to generalize this, just the two options below.
...ANSWER
Answered 2020-Jan-05 at 07:14Assuming Conv
is defined
QUESTION
Consider I have the following:
...ANSWER
Answered 2017-Sep-25 at 01:20Trivial and hardly extensible solution would be to create a wrapper, that will be called with all arguments, but will use only first few of them.
QUESTION
Some time ago came across the use of something like this:
...ANSWER
Answered 2019-Sep-05 at 05:49Are both forms of the varidic expansion valid in that context, if not why?
Both forms are indeed valid. The relevant part of grammar production is at [dcl.fct]/3
QUESTION
Given any function (or callable) type
Function
, how can I get its all arguments types as a tuple type ?
For example, I need a trait function_traits::arguments
, where:
ANSWER
Answered 2019-Aug-23 at 08:30Something like this:
QUESTION
I'm trying to build a function template, say util::caller
, to apply elements stored in std::vector
to a function that accepts those elements as arguments. For example, I have a function int func(int a, int b, int c)
and a vector of int std::vector args = {1, 2, 3}
, a function call might be like the following code snippet.
ANSWER
Answered 2019-Jul-04 at 04:53Think about this being called with two arguments:
QUESTION
I am reading some c++ code, and the code list below makes me really confused.
I can guess it tries to define a specialized template, which tries to trait the input args types. But I got a few question:
the first template looks like both deriving and template specialization, if it is deriving, how can a struct derived from itself? if it is a template specialization, where is the template defination?
ANSWER
Answered 2018-Sep-11 at 12:02The first declaration is just a definition of the primary template for struct function_traits
. Note that there's no problem with a particular specialisation of a template being derived from a different specialisation of that template (as long as there are no loops). Remember that each specialisation of a class template is a distinct, unrelated type.
The second declaration simply introduces a partial specialisation for function types, whose instantiations will likely get used as the base-class for the primary template (since the primary template derives from a specialisation whose template argument is a member function type).
QUESTION
This question combines several pieces of code and is a bit complicated, but I tried slimming it down as much as possible.
I am trying to use std::enable_if
to conditionally invoke the correct constructor as a result of ambiguous function signatures when a lambda expression is used as input, but the parameters of said lambda expression can be implicitly convertible to one another.
This is an attempt to build upon the following question: Here, but is sufficiently different and focuses on std::enable_if
to merit another question. I am also providing the Live Example that works with the problem parts commented out.
To inspect the argument (and result) types of the functor, I have the following class:
...ANSWER
Answered 2018-Mar-14 at 21:20QUESTION
I'm using the code from another answer to obtain the types of a lambda function (return and arguments). Here is the relevant code in the answer:
...ANSWER
Answered 2018-Feb-28 at 18:16As Nawaz pointed out, not all lambdas can be converted to pointers, only those without captures. For those without captures, they have an implicit conversion that can be forced by adding a +
in front.
But to directly answer your question, just alias the signature within the trait
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install function_traits
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page