I am looking for something like that:
template< typename T>
void func(T t)
{
}
template< typename... Parms>
void anyFunc( Parms... p)
{
func<Parms>(p)... ; //error
func(p)... ; //error
}
If the parameter pack expansion is done inside another function call it works:
template< typename T>
int some(T t)
{}
template< typename... Parms>
void func(Parms ...p)
{}
template< typename... Parms>
void somemore(Parms... p)
{
func( some(p)...);
}
int main()
{
somemore(1,2,3,4,10,8,7, "Hallo");
}
The parameter pack expansion will also work for a list of base class initializers.
Is there any solution which will also work for functions which will return 'void'. The above workaround will not, while using the function calls returning void inside a parameter list could never work.
Any ideas?
Parameter packs can only be expanded in a strictly-defined list of contexts, and operator , is not one of them. In other words, it's not possible to use pack expansion to generate an expression consisting of a series of subexpressions delimited by operator , .
A function parameter pack is a function parameter that accepts zero or more function arguments. A template with at least one parameter pack is called a variadic template.
Variadic templates are class or function templates, that can take any variable(zero or more) number of arguments. In C++, templates can have a fixed number of parameters only that have to be specified at the time of declaration. However, variadic templates help to overcome this issue.
Variadic functions are functions that can take a variable number of arguments. In C programming, a variadic function adds flexibility to the program. It takes one fixed argument and then any number of arguments can be passed.
Unfortunately, as you noticed, expanding a parameter pack is only valid in certain contexts where the parser expects a comma-separated list of entries – contexts where the comma is just a syntactic separator, not the comma operator. This is arguably a deficiency in the current text.
An ugly workaround:
func((some(p), 0)...);
Do note that the evaluation order of function arguments, and thus the order of the some
invocations, is unspecified, so you have to be careful with any side effects.
How about a small helper class:
template <typename Func, typename A, typename ...Args> struct Caller
{
static void call(Func & f, A && a, Args && ...args)
{
f(std::forward<A>(a));
Caller<Func, Args...>::call(f, std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
};
template <typename Func, typename A> struct Caller<Func, A>
{
static void call(Func & f, A && a)
{
f(std::forward<A>(a));
}
};
template <typename Func, typename ...Args>
void Call(Func & f, Args && ...args)
{
Caller<Func, Args...>::call(f, std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
Then you can put the following in your client code:
void foo(A);
Call(foo, a1, a2, a3);
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