This answer describes how to stream a standalone std::variant
. However, it doesn't seem to work when std::variant
is stored in a std::unordered_map
.
The following example:
#include <iostream> #include <string> #include <variant> #include <complex> #include <unordered_map> // https://stackoverflow.com/a/46893057/8414561 template<typename... Ts> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const std::variant<Ts...>& v) { std::visit([&os](auto&& arg) { os << arg; }, v); return os; } int main() { using namespace std::complex_literals; std::unordered_map<int, std::variant<int, std::string, double, std::complex<double>>> map{ {0, 4}, {1, "hello"}, {2, 3.14}, {3, 2. + 3i} }; for (const auto& [key, value] : map) std::cout << key << "=" << value << std::endl; }
fails to compile with:
In file included from main.cpp:3: /usr/local/include/c++/8.1.0/variant: In instantiation of 'constexpr const bool std::__detail::__variant::_Traits<>::_S_default_ctor': /usr/local/include/c++/8.1.0/variant:1038:11: required from 'class std::variant<>' main.cpp:27:50: required from here /usr/local/include/c++/8.1.0/variant:300:4: error: invalid use of incomplete type 'struct std::__detail::__variant::_Nth_type<0>' is_default_constructible_v<typename _Nth_type<0, _Types...>::type>; ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ /usr/local/include/c++/8.1.0/variant:58:12: note: declaration of 'struct std::__detail::__variant::_Nth_type<0>' struct _Nth_type; ^~~~~~~~~ /usr/local/include/c++/8.1.0/variant: In instantiation of 'class std::variant<>': main.cpp:27:50: required from here /usr/local/include/c++/8.1.0/variant:1051:39: error: static assertion failed: variant must have at least one alternative static_assert(sizeof...(_Types) > 0, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~
Why does it happen? How is it possible to fix it?
In [temp.arg.explicit]/3, we have this amazing sentence:
A trailing template parameter pack not otherwise deduced will be deduced to an empty sequence of template arguments.
What does this mean? What is a trailing template parameter pack? What does not otherwise deduced mean? These are all good questions that don't really have answers. But this has very interesting consequences. Consider:
template <typename... Ts> void f(std::tuple<Ts...>); f({}); // ok??
This is... well-formed. We can't deduce Ts...
so we deduce it as empty. That leaves us with std::tuple<>
, which is a perfectly valid type - and a perfectly valid type that can even be instantiated with {}
. So this compiles!
So what happens when the thing we deduce from the empty parameter pack we conjured up isn't a valid type? Here's an example:
template <class... Ts> struct Y { static_assert(sizeof...(Ts)>0, "!"); }; template <class... Ts> std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, Y<Ts...> const& ) { return os << std::endl; }
The operator<<
is a potential candidate, but deduction fails... or so it would seem. Until we conjure up Ts...
as empty. But Y<>
is an invalid type! We don't even try to find out that we can't construct a Y<>
from std::endl
- we have already failed.
This is fundamentally the same situation you have with variant
, because variant<>
is not a valid type.
The easy fix is to simply change your function template from taking a variant<Ts...>
to a variant<T, Ts...>
. This can no longer deduce to variant<>
, which isn't even a possible thing, so we don't have a problem.
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