Why definition of std::function<>::operator() in the C++ standard is:
R operator()(ArgTypes...) const;
and not
R operator()(ArgTypes&&...) const;
?
One would think that to correctly forward parameters, we need the && and then use std::forward<ArgTypes>...
in the function body when forwarding the call?
I partially reimplemented std::function to test this and I found out that if I use the &&, I get "cannot bind 'xxx' lvalue to 'xxx&&'" from g++ when I try later to pass parameters by value to operator(). I thought that I got enough grasp of the rvalue/forwarding concepts, but still I cannot grok this point. What am I missing?
What is Perfect Forwarding. Perfect forwarding allows a template function that accepts a set of arguments to forward these arguments to another function whilst retaining the lvalue or rvalue nature of the original function arguments.
std::forward If arg is an lvalue reference, the function returns arg without modifying its type. This is a helper function to allow perfect forwarding of arguments taken as rvalue references to deduced types, preserving any potential move semantics involved.
In a type declaration, “ && ” indicates either an rvalue reference or a universal reference – a reference that may resolve to either an lvalue reference or an rvalue reference. Universal references always have the form T&& for some deduced type T .
Perfect forwarding only works when the function itself (in this case operator()
) is templated and the template arguments are deduced. For std::function
, you get the operator()
argument types from the template parameters of the class itself, which means they'll never be deduced from any arguments.
The whole trick behind perfect forwarding is the template argument deduction part, which, together with reference collapsing, is what perfect forwarding is.
I'll just conveniently link to my other answer about std::forward
here, where I explain how perfect forwarding (and std::forward
) works.
Note that std::function
's operator()
doesn't need perfect forwarding, since the user himself decides what the parameters should be. This is also the reason why you cannot just add &&
to operator()
; take this example:
void foo(int){}
int main(){
// assume 'std::function' uses 'ArgTypes&&...' in 'operator()'
std::function<void(int)> f(foo);
// 'f's 'operator()' will be instantiated as
// 'void operator()(int&&)'
// which will only accept rvalues
int i = 5;
f(i); // error
f(5); // OK, '5' is an rvalue
}
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With