I got this error while trying to work with std::array in googletest. Following is a minimal example that produces this error:
arr.cpp
#include "gtest/gtest.h"
#include <array>
TEST(Test, Positive) {
EXPECT_NO_THROW({
const std::array<unsigned char, 16> foo = {1, 2, 3};
});
}
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
::testing::InitGoogleTest(&argc, argv);
return RUN_ALL_TESTS();
}
I used the current googletest code from github. To make & make install googletest.
As a compiler I used clang3.8 on Ubuntu 14.04 LTS.
Using the follownig command:
clang++ -std=c++11 -o arr arr.cpp
Results in:
arr.cpp:6:41: error: too many arguments provided to function-like macro invocation
const std::array<unsigned char, 16> blasdasd = {1, 2, 3};
^
/usr/local/include/gtest/gtest.h:1845:9: note: macro 'EXPECT_NO_THROW' defined here
#define EXPECT_NO_THROW(statement) \
^
arr.cpp:5:5: note: cannot use initializer list at the beginning of a macro argument
EXPECT_NO_THROW({
^ ~
arr.cpp:5:5: error: use of undeclared identifier 'EXPECT_NO_THROW'
EXPECT_NO_THROW({
^
2 errors generated.
Removing the EXPECT_NO_THROW macro and simply declaring the array compiles fine. Is there anything obvious I am missing or should I file a bug report on github?
The EXPECT_NO_THROW
is a macro defined as follows:
#define EXPECT_NO_THROW(statement) \
GTEST_TEST_NO_THROW_(statement, GTEST_NONFATAL_FAILURE_)
As you can see, this is a function-like macro which takes one argument. The preprocessor (which deals with macros) works on tokens. It does not understand C++, nor C, but only its own token language. (Nowadays, compilation and preprocessing happen in one stage apparently, but I'm referring to the semantics of the preprocessor language.)
The preprocessor expects a single argument for EXPECT_NO_THROW
. It separates arguments for function-like macros by looking for commas. So when it sees a list of tokens in the argument list for a function-like macro such as:
EXPECT_NO_THROW( const std::array<unsigned char, 16> foo = {1, 2, 3}; )
then it separates the argument list into arguments as follows:
const std::array<unsigned char
16> foo = {1
2
3};
And these are of course multiple arguments where one is expected for the function-like macro EXPECT_NO_THROW
.
In order to pass several preprocessing tokens including ,
as a single argument to a function-like macro, you can enclose those tokens in parentheses:
EXPECT_NO_THROW( (const std::array<unsigned char, 16> foo = {1, 2, 3};) );
However, this will not compile:
The EXPECT_NO_THROW
macro is expanded as follows:
#define GTEST_TEST_NO_THROW_(statement, fail) \
GTEST_AMBIGUOUS_ELSE_BLOCKER_ \
if (::testing::internal::AlwaysTrue()) { \
try { \
GTEST_SUPPRESS_UNREACHABLE_CODE_WARNING_BELOW_(statement); \
} \
catch (...) { \
goto GTEST_CONCAT_TOKEN_(gtest_label_testnothrow_, __LINE__); \
} \
} else \
GTEST_CONCAT_TOKEN_(gtest_label_testnothrow_, __LINE__): \
fail("Expected: " #statement " doesn't throw an exception.\n" \
" Actual: it throws.")
Where the unreachable code macro is defined as follows:
#define GTEST_SUPPRESS_UNREACHABLE_CODE_WARNING_BELOW_(statement) \
if (::testing::internal::AlwaysTrue()) { statement; }
So, if you put a statement STMT
inside the EXPECT_NO_THROW
macro, you'll end up with:
if (::testing::internal::AlwaysTrue()) {
try {
if (::testing::internal::AlwaysTrue()) { STMT; };
}
// ...
Therefore, if you put (STMT;)
into EXPECT_NO_THROW
, you end up with a line
if (::testing::internal::AlwaysTrue()) { (STMT;); };
The part (STMT;);
is not legal C++. Neither is (STMT);
if that STMT
is a declaration as in the OP.
If you pass ({STMT;})
into the macro, you'll end up with ({STMT;});
which is still illegal in C++, but it's allowed in g++ as an extension; it's an expression-statement. Here, the {STMT;}
part is interpreted as an expression, enclosed in parentheses to form the expression ({STMT;})
.
You can also try to isolate the commas. As Yakk pointed out in a comment to the OP, you can hide the comma in the template-argument list by using a typedef; the remaining commas in the initializer-list can be wrapped by using a temporary, for example:
using array_t = std::array<unsigned char, 16>;
EXPECT_NO_THROW( const array_t foo = (array_t{1, 2, 3}); );
While the original EXPECT_NO_THROW(STMT)
does allow STMT
to be a statement, statements in C++ cannot be arbitrarily enclosed in parentheses. Expressions however can be arbitrarily enclosed in parentheses, and expressions can be used as a statement. This is why passing the statement as an expression-statement works. If we can formulate our array declaration as an expression, this will solve the problem:
EXPECT_NO_THROW(( std::array<unsigned char, 16>{1, 2, 3} ));
Notice this creates a temporary array; this is not a declaration-statement as in the OP, but a single expression.
But it might not always be this simple to create an expression of the things we want to test. However, there's one expression in standard C++ which can contain statements: A lambda-expression.
EXPECT_NO_THROW(( []{ const std::array<unsigned char, 16> foo = {1, 2, 3}; }() ));
Please note the ()
after the lambda which is important to actually execute the statement within the lamdba! Forgetting this is a very subtle source of errors :(
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