std::get
does not seem to be SFINAE-friendly, as shown by the following test case:
template <class T, class C>
auto foo(C &c) -> decltype(std::get<T>(c)) {
return std::get<T>(c);
}
template <class>
void foo(...) { }
int main() {
std::tuple<int> tuple{42};
foo<int>(tuple); // Works fine
foo<double>(tuple); // Crashes and burns
}
See it live on Coliru
The goal is to divert the second call to foo
towards the second overload. In practice, libstdc++ gives:
/usr/local/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/6.3.0/../../../../include/c++/6.3.0/tuple:1290:14: fatal error: no matching function for call to '__get_helper2'
{ return std::__get_helper2<_Tp>(__t); }
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
libc++ is more direct, with a straight static_assert
detonation:
/usr/include/c++/v1/tuple:801:5: fatal error: static_assert failed "type not found in type list"
static_assert ( value != -1, "type not found in type list" );
^ ~~~~~~~~~~~
I would really like not to implement onion layers checking whether C
is an std::tuple
specialization, and looking for T
inside its parameters...
Is there a reason for std::get
not to be SFINAE-friendly? Is there a better workaround than what is outlined above?
I've found something about std::tuple_element
, but not std::get
.
std::get<T>
is explicitly not SFINAE-friendly, as per [tuple.elem]:
template <class T, class... Types> constexpr T& get(tuple<Types...>& t) noexcept; // and the other like overloads
Requires: The type
T
occurs exactly once inTypes...
. Otherwise, the program is ill-formed.
std::get<I>
is also explicitly not SFINAE-friendly.
As far as the other questions:
Is there a reason for
std::get
not to be SFINAE-friendly?
Don't know. Typically, this isn't a point that needs to be SFINAE-ed on. So I guess it wasn't considered something that needed to be done. Hard errors are a lot easier to understand than scrolling through a bunch of non-viable candidate options. If you believe there to be compelling reason for std::get<T>
to be SFINAE-friendly, you could submit an LWG issue about it.
Is there a better workaround than what is outlined above?
Sure. You could write your own SFINAE-friendly verison of get
(please note, it uses C++17 fold expression):
template <class T, class... Types,
std::enable_if_t<(std::is_same<T, Types>::value + ...) == 1, int> = 0>
constexpr T& my_get(tuple<Types...>& t) noexcept {
return std::get<T>(t);
}
And then do with that as you wish.
Don't SFINAE on std::get
; that is not permitted.
Here are two relatively sfinae friendly ways to test if you can using std::get; get<X>(t)
:
template<class T,std::size_t I>
using can_get=std::integral_constant<bool, I<std::tuple_size<T>::value>;
namespace helper{
template<class T, class Tuple>
struct can_get_type:std::false_type{};
template<class T, class...Ts>
struct can_get_type<T,std::tuple<Ts...>>:
std::integral_constant<bool, (std::is_same_v<T,Ts>+...)==1>
{};
}
template<class T,class Tuple>
using can_get=typename helpers::can_get_type<T,Tuple>::type;
Then your code reads:
template <class T, class C, std::enable_if_t<can_get_type<C,T>{},int> =0>
decltype(auto) foo(C &c) {
return std::get<T>(c);
}
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