C++11 way to index tuple at runtime without using switch
Here's a version that doesn't use an index sequence:
template <size_t I>
struct visit_impl
{
template <typename T, typename F>
static void visit(T& tup, size_t idx, F fun)
{
if (idx == I - 1) fun(std::get<I - 1>(tup));
else visit_impl<I - 1>::visit(tup, idx, fun);
}
};
template <>
struct visit_impl<0>
{
template <typename T, typename F>
static void visit(T& tup, size_t idx, F fun) { assert(false); }
};
template <typename F, typename... Ts>
void visit_at(std::tuple<Ts...> const& tup, size_t idx, F fun)
{
visit_impl<sizeof...(Ts)>::visit(tup, idx, fun);
}
template <typename F, typename... Ts>
void visit_at(std::tuple<Ts...>& tup, size_t idx, F fun)
{
visit_impl<sizeof...(Ts)>::visit(tup, idx, fun);
}
DEMO
Here's an unreadably over-generic implementation without recursion. I don't think I'd use this in production - it's a good example of write-only code - but it's interesting that it can be done. (DEMO):
#include <array>
#include <cstddef>
#include <initializer_list>
#include <tuple>
#include <iostream>
#include <type_traits>
#include <utility>
template <std::size_t...Is> struct index_sequence {};
template <std::size_t N, std::size_t...Is>
struct build : public build<N - 1, N - 1, Is...> {};
template <std::size_t...Is>
struct build<0, Is...> {
using type = index_sequence<Is...>;
};
template <std::size_t N>
using make_index_sequence = typename build<N>::type;
template <typename T>
using remove_reference_t = typename std::remove_reference<T>::type;
namespace detail {
template <class Tuple, class F, std::size_t...Is>
void tuple_switch(const std::size_t i, Tuple&& t, F&& f, index_sequence<Is...>) {
[](...){}(
(i == Is && (
(void)std::forward<F>(f)(std::get<Is>(std::forward<Tuple>(t))), false))...
);
}
} // namespace detail
template <class Tuple, class F>
void tuple_switch(const std::size_t i, Tuple&& t, F&& f) {
static constexpr auto N =
std::tuple_size<remove_reference_t<Tuple>>::value;
detail::tuple_switch(i, std::forward<Tuple>(t), std::forward<F>(f),
make_index_sequence<N>{});
}
constexpr struct {
template <typename T>
void operator()(const T& t) const {
std::cout << t << '\n';
}
} print{};
int main() {
{
auto const t = std::make_tuple(42, 'z', 3.14, 13, 0, "Hello, World!");
for (std::size_t i = 0; i < std::tuple_size<decltype(t)>::value; ++i) {
tuple_switch(i, t, print);
}
}
std::cout << '\n';
{
auto const t = std::array<int, 4>{{0,1,2,3}};
for (std::size_t i = 0; i < t.size(); ++i) {
tuple_switch(i, t, print);
}
}
}
It's possible but it's pretty ugly:
#include <tuple>
#include <iostream>
template<typename T>
void doSomething(T t) { std::cout << t << '\n';}
template<int... N>
struct Switch;
template<int N, int... Ns>
struct Switch<N, Ns...>
{
template<typename... T>
void operator()(int n, std::tuple<T...>& t)
{
if (n == N)
doSomething(std::get<N>(t));
else
Switch<Ns...>()(n, t);
}
};
// default
template<>
struct Switch<>
{
template<typename... T>
void operator()(int n, std::tuple<T...>& t) { }
};
int main()
{
std::tuple<int, char, double, int, int, const char*> t;
Switch<1, 2, 4, 5>()(4, t);
}
Just list each constant that would have been a case
label in the original switch
in the template argument list for the Switch
specialization.
For this to compile, doSomething(std::get<N>(t))
must be a valid expression for every N
in the argument list of the Switch
specialization ... but that's true of the switch
statement too.
For a small number of cases it compiles to the same code as a switch
, I didn't check if it scales to large numbers of cases.
If you don't want to type out every number in Switch<1, 2, 3, 4, ... 255>
then you could create a std::integer_sequence
and then use that to instantiate the Switch
:
template<size_t... N>
Switch<N...>
make_switch(std::index_sequence<N...>)
{
return {};
}
std::tuple<int, char, double, int, int, const char*> t;
make_switch(std::make_index_sequence<4>{})(3, t);
This creates a Switch<0,1,2,3>
so if you don't want the 0
case you'd need to manipulate the index_sequence
, e.g. this chops the zero off the front of the list:
template<size_t... N>
Switch<N...>
make_switch(std::index_sequence<0, N...>)
{
return {};
}
Unfortunately GCC crashes when trying to compile make_index_sequence<255>
as it involves too much recursion and uses too much memory, and Clang rejects it by default too (because it has a very low default for -ftemplate-instantiation-depth
) so this isn't a very practical solution!