Reputation: 68648
Consider the following program:
#include <string>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
struct T
{
int a;
double b;
string c;
};
vector<T> V;
int main()
{
V.emplace_back(42, 3.14, "foo");
}
It doesn't work:
$ g++ -std=gnu++11 ./test.cpp
In file included from /usr/include/c++/4.7/x86_64-linux-gnu/bits/c++allocator.h:34:0,
from /usr/include/c++/4.7/bits/allocator.h:48,
from /usr/include/c++/4.7/string:43,
from ./test.cpp:1:
/usr/include/c++/4.7/ext/new_allocator.h: In instantiation of ‘void __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<_Tp>::construct(_Up*, _Args&& ...) [with _Up = T; _Args = {int, double, const char (&)[4]}; _Tp = T]’:
/usr/include/c++/4.7/bits/alloc_traits.h:253:4: required from ‘static typename std::enable_if<std::allocator_traits<_Alloc>::__construct_helper<_Tp, _Args>::value, void>::type std::allocator_traits<_Alloc>::_S_construct(_Alloc&, _Tp*, _Args&& ...) [with _Tp = T; _Args = {int, double, const char (&)[4]}; _Alloc = std::allocator<T>; typename std::enable_if<std::allocator_traits<_Alloc>::__construct_helper<_Tp, _Args>::value, void>::type = void]’
/usr/include/c++/4.7/bits/alloc_traits.h:390:4: required from ‘static void std::allocator_traits<_Alloc>::construct(_Alloc&, _Tp*, _Args&& ...) [with _Tp = T; _Args = {int, double, const char (&)[4]}; _Alloc = std::allocator<T>]’
/usr/include/c++/4.7/bits/vector.tcc:97:6: required from ‘void std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::emplace_back(_Args&& ...) [with _Args = {int, double, const char (&)[4]}; _Tp = T; _Alloc = std::allocator<T>]’
./test.cpp:17:32: required from here
/usr/include/c++/4.7/ext/new_allocator.h:110:4: error: no matching function for call to ‘T::T(int, double, const char [4])’
/usr/include/c++/4.7/ext/new_allocator.h:110:4: note: candidates are:
./test.cpp:6:8: note: T::T()
./test.cpp:6:8: note: candidate expects 0 arguments, 3 provided
./test.cpp:6:8: note: T::T(const T&)
./test.cpp:6:8: note: candidate expects 1 argument, 3 provided
./test.cpp:6:8: note: T::T(T&&)
./test.cpp:6:8: note: candidate expects 1 argument, 3 provided
What is the correct way to do this and why?
(Also tried single and double braces)
Upvotes: 134
Views: 82698
Reputation: 1640
emplace_back returns a reference in c++17 and newer, so you can do this...
#include <string>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
struct T
{
int a;
double b;
string c;
};
vector<T> V;
int main()
{
V.emplace_back() = { 42, 3.14, "foo" };
}
Upvotes: 8
Reputation: 6027
For anyone from the future, this behavior will be changed in C++20.
In other words, even though implementation internally will still call T(arg0, arg1, ...)
it will be considered as regular T{arg0, arg1, ...}
that you would expect.
Upvotes: 65
Reputation: 1
You can create the struct T
instance and then move it to the vector:
V.push_back(std::move(T {42, 3.14, "foo"}));
Upvotes: -3
Reputation: 490148
You need to explicitly define a ctor for the class:
#include <string>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
struct T
{
int a;
double b;
string c;
T(int a, double b, string &&c)
: a(a)
, b(b)
, c(std::move(c))
{}
};
vector<T> V;
int main()
{
V.emplace_back(42, 3.14, "foo");
}
The point of using emplace_back
is to avoid creating a temporary object, which is then copied (or moved) to the destination. While it is also possible to create a temporary object, then pass that to emplace_back
, it defeats (at least most of) the purpose. What you want to do is pass individual arguments, then let emplace_back
invoke the ctor with those arguments to create the object in place.
Upvotes: 136
Reputation: 948
If you do not want to (or cannot) add a constructor, specialize allocator for T (or create your own allocator).
namespace std {
template<>
struct allocator<T> {
typedef T value_type;
value_type* allocate(size_t n) { return static_cast<value_type*>(::operator new(sizeof(value_type) * n)); }
void deallocate(value_type* p, size_t n) { return ::operator delete(static_cast<void*>(p)); }
template<class U, class... Args>
void construct(U* p, Args&&... args) { ::new(static_cast<void*>(p)) U{ std::forward<Args>(args)... }; }
};
}
Note: Member function construct shown above cannot compile with clang 3.1(Sorry, I don't know why). Try next one if you will use clang 3.1 (or other reasons).
void construct(T* p, int a, double b, const string& c) { ::new(static_cast<void*>(p)) T{ a, b, c }; }
Upvotes: 13
Reputation: 96241
This seems to be covered in 23.2.1/13.
First, definitions:
Given a container type X having an allocator_type identical to A and a value_type identical to T and given an lvalue m of type A, a pointer p of type T*, an expression v of type T, and an rvalue rv of type T, the following terms are defined.
Now, what makes it emplace-constructible:
T is EmplaceConstructible into X from args , for zero or more arguments args, means that the following expression is well-formed: allocator_traits::construct(m, p, args);
And finally a note about the default implementation of the construct call:
Note: A container calls allocator_traits::construct(m, p, args) to construct an element at p using args. The default construct in std::allocator will call ::new((void*)p) T(args), but specialized allocators may choose a different definition.
This pretty much tells us that for a default (and potentially the only) allocator scheme you must have defined a constructor with the proper number of arguments for the thing you're trying to emplace-construct into a container.
Upvotes: 7
Reputation: 241731
Of course, this is not an answer, but it shows an interesting feature of tuples:
#include <string>
#include <tuple>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
using T = tuple <
int,
double,
string
>;
vector<T> V;
int main()
{
V.emplace_back(42, 3.14, "foo");
}
Upvotes: 31
Reputation: 7129
you have to define a constructor for your type T
because it contains an std::string
which is not trivial.
moreover, it would be better to define (possible defaulted) move ctor/assign (because you have a movable std::string
as member) -- this would help to move your T
much more efficient...
or, just use T{...}
to call overloaded emplace_back()
as recommended in neighboug response... everything depends on your typical use cases...
Upvotes: -2