Reputation: 2062
I want to create a function like:
template < typename Other, typename Func, typename T, typename ...Rest >
void visit( Other &&other, Func &&visitor )
{
// Wrap "visitor" and "other" with "std::forward" calls
visitor( make_object<T>(other) );
visit<Other, Func, Rest...>( other, visitor );
}
The problem is that "Func" may not support all of the types in the list, then the compiler will crap out at the first bad one. I don't want that; I want it to do some default action instead (for my case, do nothing at all).
template < typename Other, typename Func, typename T, typename ...Rest >
void visit( Other &&other, Func &&visitor )
{
// Wrap "visitor" and "other" with "std::forward" calls
if ( Func-can-support-T-either-directly-or-by-converting-it )
visitor( make_object<T>(other) );
else
; // might be a throw or a logging instead
visit<Other, Func, Rest...>( other, visitor );
}
I guess that I can make 2 overloaded auxiliary functions, one taking std::true_type
based on the test for compatibility, and the other std::false_type
. But how do I create the test?
(Suggestions for a better title and/or additional tags appreciated.)
Upvotes: 2
Views: 105
Reputation: 300209
As with all problems in computing, a simple level of indirection is all you need :)
Here is a simple apply
function that has a default implementation when things don't work as you wish they did.
template <typename Func>
void apply(Func&& f, ...) { std::cout << "default\n"; }
template <typename Func, typename T>
auto apply(Func&& f, T&& t) -> decltype(f(std::forward<T>(t))) {
return f(std::forward<T>(t));
}
We can exercise it easily enough:
struct Foo {};
struct Bar {};
struct F {
void operator()(Foo) { std::cout << "Foo\n"; }
void operator()(Bar) { std::cout << "Bar\n"; }
};
int main() {
F f;
Foo foo;
Bar bar;
int i;
apply(f, foo);
apply(f, bar);
apply(f, i);
}
Ideone gives the following output:
Foo
Bar
default
as expected.
Upvotes: 3