使用Lambda / Template / SFINAE自动尝试/捕获保护蹦床功能 [英] Using Lambda/Template/SFINAE to automate try/catch-safeguarding of trampoline functions

查看:158
本文介绍了使用Lambda / Template / SFINAE自动尝试/捕获保护蹦床功能的处理方法,对大家解决问题具有一定的参考价值,需要的朋友们下面随着小编来一起学习吧!

问题描述

我有100个蹦床功能。我想知道是否可以自动将每一个包装在try / catch块中。



请提前警告,这不是一个容易的问题。我将首先描述(简化)代码的问题,然后尝试在下面最好地回答它,所以读者可能会看到我在哪里。



Foo有一个函数指针表:



EDIT :这是一个 C函数指针表。因此它可以接受 static W :: w

签名在这里: http://svn.python.org/projects/python/trunk/Include/object.h



编辑:我试过了一个测试用例 here : / p>

  class Foo {
表table;
Foo(){
//每个插槽都有一个默认的lambda。

table-> fp_53 = [](S s,A a,B b) - > int {cout<<load me!;};
table-> fp_54 = [](S s,C c,D d,E e) float {cout<<load me!;};
// ^注意:slots可能有不同的签名
//只保证第一个参数's s'
}

// Foo也有一个方法用于加载特定的槽:

void load53(){ta​​ble-> fp_53 = func53; }
void load54(){ta​​ble-> fp_54 = func54; }

}

是什么被加载到它:

  int func53(S s,A a,B b){
try {
return get_base(s) - > f53(a,b);
}
catch(...){return 42;}
}

float func54(S s,C c,D d,E e){
try {
return get_base(s) - > f54(c,d,e);
}
catch(...){return 3.14;}
}


$ b b

我试图使用lambdas来实现这一点,以便绕过必须分别定义所有这些 func53 。像这样:

  class Foo {

void load53(){
table - > fp_53 =
[](S s,A a,B b)→int {return get_base(s)→f53(a,b) }
}
void load54(){
table-> fp_54 =
[](S s,C c,D d,E e) get_base(s)→f54(c,d,e); }
}

但是,这无法捕获错误。我需要在返回语句的try / catch:

  try {return get_base(s) - > f53 a,b); } catch {return 42; } 

但是,这会产生很多混乱。这将是很好,如果我能做:

 返回trap(get_base(s) - > f53(a,b); )

我的问题是:有没有办法写这个 code> function(不使用#define)?






这是我到目前为止:



我认为这会传递所有必要的信息:

  trap< int,& Base :: f53>(s,a,b)



然后看起来像这样:

  template< typename RET,Base :: Func> 
static RET
trap(S s,...){
try {
return get_base(s) - > Func(...)
}
catch {
return std :: is_integral< RET> :: value? (RET)(42):(RET)(3.14);
}
}

这可能允许一个非常干净的语法:

  class Foo {

void load53(){ta​​ble-> fp_53 =& trap< INT ,& Base :: f53> ;; }
void load54(){ta​​ble-> fp_54 =& trap< float,& Base :: f54& }
}

在这一点上,我甚至不确定是否违反了一些法律。 table-> fp_53 必须是有效的C函数指针。



传递非静态成员函数的地址(& Base :: f53> )不会违反这个,因为它是一个模板参数,并且不影响 / code>



同样, ... 应该没问题,因为C允许varargs。



所以如果这确实有效,可以清理吗?



我的想法是:



1)也许...应该被移回模板参数作为一个包。

2)也许可以推导出陷阱的返回类型,保存一个模板参数



3) Base :: Func 模板参数是非法语法。我怀疑它甚至不接近法律的东西。

解决方案

  #include< utility> 

template< typename T,T t>
struct trap;

template< typename R,typename ... Args,R(Base :: * t)(Args ...)>
struct trap< R(Base :: *)(Args ...),t>
{
static R call(int s,Args ... args)
{
try
{
return(get_base(s) - > * t)(std :: forward< Args(args)...);
}
catch(...)
{
return std :: is_integral< R> :: value? static_cast(R)(42)
:static_cast< R>(3.14);
}
}
};

使用方法:



  table-> fp_53 =& trap< decltype(& Base :: f53),& Base :: f53& 
table-> fp_54 =& trap< decltype(& Base :: f54),& Base :: f54&

DEMO






> std :: forward 仍然可以使用,但 Args 本身不是转发引用。 p>

I have 100 or so trampoline functions. I would like to know whether it is possible to automate wrapping each one inside a try/catch block.

Please be warned in advance, this is not an easy question. I will start by describing the problem with (simplified) code, and will then attempt to answer it as best I can below, so the reader may see where I am at.

Foo has a function pointer table:

EDIT: This is a C function pointer table. So it could accept static W::w.
Signatures are here: http://svn.python.org/projects/python/trunk/Include/object.h

EDIT: I've attempted a test case here:

class Foo {
    Table table;
    Foo() {
        // Each slot has a default lambda.
        :
        table->fp_53 = [](S s, A a, B b)      -> int   {cout<<"load me!";};
        table->fp_54 = [](S s, C c, D d, E e) -> float {cout<<"load me!";};
        // ^ Note: slots MAY have different signatures
        //         only the first parameter 'S s' is guaranteed
    }

    // Foo also has a method for loading a particular slot:
    :
    void load53() { table->fp_53 = func53; }
    void load54() { table->fp_54 = func54; }
    :
}

If a particular slot is 'loaded', this is what gets loaded into it:

int func53(S s, A a, B b) { 
    try{
        return get_base(s)->f53(a,b);
    } 
    catch(...) { return 42;} 
}

float func54(S s, C c, D d, E e) { 
    try{
        return get_base(s)->f54(c,d,e);
    } 
    catch(...) { return 3.14;} 
}

I am trying to accomplish this using lambdas, so as to bypass having to define all of these func53 separately. Something like this:

class Foo {
    :
    void load53() { 
        table->fp_53 =
            [](S s, A a, B b)->int { return get_base(s)->f53(a,b); }
    }
    void load54() { 
        table->fp_54 =
            [](S s, C c, D d, E e)->float { return get_base(s)->f54(c,d,e); }
    }

However, this is failing to trap errors. I need to be putting a try/catch around the return statement:

try{ return get_base(s)->f53(a,b); } catch{ return 42; }

However, this creates a lot of clutter. It would be nice if I could do:

return trap( get_base(s)->f53(a,b); )

My question is: is there any way to write this trap function (without using #define)?


This is what I've come up with so far:

I think this would pass all the necessary information:

trap<int, &Base::f53>(s,a,b)

trap's definition could then look like this:

template<typename RET, Base::Func>
static RET 
trap(S s, ...) {
    try {
        return get_base(s)->Func(...);
    }
    catch {
        return std::is_integral<RET>::value ? (RET)(42) : (RET)(3.14); 
    }
}

This may allow for a very clean syntax:

class Foo {
    :
    void load53() { table->fp_53 = &trap<int,   &Base::f53>; }
    void load54() { table->fp_54 = &trap<float, &Base::f54>; }
}

At this point I'm not even sure whether some laws have been violated. table->fp_53 must be a valid C function pointer.

Passing in the address of a nonstatic member function (&Base::f53>) won't violate this, as it is a template parameter, and is not affecting the signature for trap

Similarly, ... should be okay as C allows varargs.

So if this is indeed valid, can it be cleaned up?

My thoughts are:

1) maybe the ... should be moved back to the template parameter as a pack.
2) maybe it is possible to deduce the return type for trap, and save one template parameter

3) that Base::Func template parameter is illegal syntax. And I suspect it isn't even close to something legal. Which might scupper the whole approach.

解决方案

#include <utility>

template <typename T, T t>
struct trap;

template <typename R, typename... Args, R(Base::*t)(Args...)>
struct trap<R(Base::*)(Args...), t>
{    
    static R call(int s, Args... args)
    {
        try
        {
            return (get_base(s)->*t)(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
        }
        catch (...)
        {
            return std::is_integral<R>::value ? static_cast<R>(42)
                                              : static_cast<R>(3.14); 
        }
    }
};

Usage:

table->fp_53 = &trap<decltype(&Base::f53), &Base::f53>::call;
table->fp_54 = &trap<decltype(&Base::f54), &Base::f54>::call;

DEMO


Note: std::forward can still be used although Args is not a forwarding reference itself.

这篇关于使用Lambda / Template / SFINAE自动尝试/捕获保护蹦床功能的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持IT屋!

查看全文
登录 关闭
扫码关注1秒登录
发送“验证码”获取 | 15天全站免登陆