CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c++c
dcw
dcw

Reputation: 3565

Has anyone ever had a use for the __COUNTER__ pre-processor macro?

The __COUNTER__ symbol is provided by VC++ and GCC, and gives an increasing non-negative integral value each time it is used.

I'm interested to learn whether anyone's ever used it, and whether it's something that would be worth standardising?

Upvotes: 71

Views: 67505

Answers (20)

Charlie Martin
Charlie Martin

Reputation: 112404

I've never used it for anything but a DEBUG macro. It's convenient to be able to say

#define WAYPOINT \
    do { if(dbg) printf("At marker: %d\n", __COUNTER__); } while(0)

Upvotes: 12

Sz.
Sz.

Reputation: 3644

It's also very useful to overcome some of the limitations of C++ enums. Consider e.g. a hierarchy of widgets, each with its own set of specific events, which all must have different IDs (e.g. for using them as keys in a callback map):

template <int N> struct EnumValue { static constexpr int value = N; };

#define UNIQUE_ID EnumValue<__COUNTER__>::value

class Widget {
public:
    enum Event {
        A = UNIQUE_ID,
        B = UNIQUE_ID
    };
};

class Button : public Widget {
public:
    enum Event {
        C = UNIQUE_ID
    };
};


#include <iostream>

int main()
{
    std::cout << (int) Widget::Event::A << ", " << (int) Button::Event::C << "\n";
}

While there are other techniques to achieve (roughly) the same, most of them are more cumbersome/tedious.

Upvotes: 0

johnjohnlys
johnjohnlys

Reputation: 394

While this is an old post, I recently find that __COUNTER__ can effectively generate a C++ namedtuple easily, converting your struct into a tuple. This allows me to implement type reflection like boost::hana, but way more faster.

I post the POC here with several use cases and benchmarks. https://github.com/johnjohnlin/namedtuple

struct S { int x; float y; string z; };
// DEFINE_NAMEDTUPLE(S2)
struct S2 {
    static constexpr int Base = 100 + 1; // __COUNTER__ is 100 here
// NT_MEMBER
    int     x;
    int&    get(integral_constant<unsigned, 101-Base>) { return x; }
// NT_MEMBER
    float   y;
    float&  get(integral_constant<unsigned, 102-Base>) { return y; }
// NT_MEMBER
    string  z;
    string& get(integral_constant<unsigned, 103-Base>) { return z; }
// END_DEFINE_NAMEDTUPLE(S2)
    static constexpr int End = 104;
    static constexpr int num_members = End - Base;
    template<unsigned x> auto& get() { return get(integral_constant<unsigned, x>()); }
};
S2 s_namedtuple;
s_namedtuple.get<1>(); // float, the reference of y
static_assert(sizeof(S2) == sizeof(S)); // namedtuple does not add extra members!
static_assert(sizeof(S2::num_members) == 3u); // namedtuple also provides ::num_members
S2::get_name<1>(); // string("y")

Upvotes: 0

Kaz
Kaz

Reputation: 58627

__COUNTER__ can be used to establish unique local variables. The problem with __COUNTER__ is that its value is different on each expansion. But what we can do is split our macro into two:

#define MACRO_IMPL(COUNTER, ARG1, ARG2, ..., ARGN)

#define MACRO(ARG1, ARG2, ..., ARGN) MACRO_IMPL(__COUNTER__, ARG1, ARG2, ... ARGN)

So now MACRO_IMPL has a unique counter, via the COUNTER argument value, which it can use to generate local symbols that are defined and referenced multiple times. E.g.

#define CAT(A, B) A ## B
#define XCAT(A, B) CAT(A, B)
#define U(COUNTER) XCAT(__U, COUNTER)

#define REPEAT_IMPL(C, N) for (int U(C) = 0; U(C) < (N); U(C)++)

#define REPEAT(N) REPEAT_IMPL(__COUNTER__, N)

REPEAT (42) { puts("Hey!"); REPEAT (73) { puts("Cool!"); } }

Expansion by gcc -E -:

# 1 "<stdin>"
# 1 "<built-in>"
# 1 "<command-line>"
# 31 "<command-line>"
# 1 "/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 32 "<command-line>" 2
# 1 "<stdin>"
# 9 "<stdin>"
    for (int __U0 = 0; __U0 < (42); __U0++) { puts("Hey!"); for (int __U1 = 0; __U1 < (73); __U1++) { puts("Cool!"); } }

I put the loops in one line on purpose; that's a situation where using __LINE__ instead of __COUNTER__ could break.

Upvotes: 3

Matt Eding
Matt Eding

Reputation: 1012

I have found it useful for displaying steps in a UI. This makes it really easy to add, remove, or reorder steps without worrying about the steps getting mislabeled.

#include <iostream>

#define STR_IMPL(s)  #s
#define STR(s)  STR_IMPL(s)
#define STEP  STR(__COUNTER__) ": "

int main()
{
    std::cout 
        << STEP "foo\n"
        << STEP "bar\n"
        << STEP "qux\n"
        ;
}

Output:

0: foo
1: bar
2: qux

Having it start from 1 instead of 0 is left as an exercise.

Upvotes: 0

YourZombieMop
YourZombieMop

Reputation: 73

Generating Class Type IDs (C++)

I've used __COUNTER__ to automatically generate type IDs for Entities & Colliders in an object-oriented game.

This game uses polymorphism to achieve its functionality. To serialize child objects, I had to figure out a way to store Entity child types & serialize/deserialize them for scene saving & loading. When reading an entity from a save file (deserializing), I needed to know what properties to expect to read; with __COUNTER__, I have a unique and constant ID for each entity class and can load them in as the proper entity type using this ID.

This approach means that to make a new Entity type serializable, all I have to add is typeID = __COUNTER__; within the constructor to overwrite the default ID. In the case of Sprite:

Sprite(/* TODO: Sprite Arguments */) : Entity(/* TODO: Entity Arguments */) {
    typeID = __COUNTER__;
}

... and go on to outline its iostream overloads:

friend std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const Sprite& rhs) {
    return os << /* TODO: Outline Output */;
}
friend std::istream& operator>>(std::istream& is, Sprite& rhs) {
    return is >> /* TODO: Outline Input */;
}

It's a very lightweight approach to generating type IDs for your classes, and avoids a bunch of complicated logic. As a preprocessor command it's pretty basic, but it provides a useful tool for some key appliances.

Note: If you want to restart the ID value to 0 when calling the counter, store its value on the generation of your first ID and subtract all subsequent IDs by that value.

Thanks for reading! -YZM

Upvotes: 5

SSpoke
SSpoke

Reputation: 5836

__COUNTER__ is very useful when you are encrypting strings in runtime and you want every string to have a unique key, without storing a counter somewhere for the key of your encryption you can use Counter to be sure that every string has it's own unique key!.

I use it in my XorString 1 header library which decrypts strings in run-time, so if any hackers/crackers try to look at my binary file they won't find the strings there, but when the program runs every string is decrypted and shown as normal.

#pragma once
#include <string>
#include <array>
#include <cstdarg>

#define BEGIN_NAMESPACE( x ) namespace x {
#define END_NAMESPACE }

BEGIN_NAMESPACE(XorCompileTime)

constexpr auto time = __TIME__;
constexpr auto seed = static_cast< int >(time[7]) + static_cast< int >(time[6]) * 10 + static_cast< int >(time[4]) * 60 + static_cast< int >(time[3]) * 600 + static_cast< int >(time[1]) * 3600 + static_cast< int >(time[0]) * 36000;

// 1988, Stephen Park and Keith Miller
// "Random Number Generators: Good Ones Are Hard To Find", considered as "minimal standard"
// Park-Miller 31 bit pseudo-random number generator, implemented with G. Carta's optimisation:
// with 32-bit math and without division

template < int N >
struct RandomGenerator
{
private:
    static constexpr unsigned a = 16807; // 7^5
    static constexpr unsigned m = 2147483647; // 2^31 - 1

    static constexpr unsigned s = RandomGenerator< N - 1 >::value;
    static constexpr unsigned lo = a * (s & 0xFFFF); // Multiply lower 16 bits by 16807
    static constexpr unsigned hi = a * (s >> 16); // Multiply higher 16 bits by 16807
    static constexpr unsigned lo2 = lo + ((hi & 0x7FFF) << 16); // Combine lower 15 bits of hi with lo's upper bits
    static constexpr unsigned hi2 = hi >> 15; // Discard lower 15 bits of hi
    static constexpr unsigned lo3 = lo2 + hi;

public:
    static constexpr unsigned max = m;
    static constexpr unsigned value = lo3 > m ? lo3 - m : lo3;
};

template <>
struct RandomGenerator< 0 >
{
    static constexpr unsigned value = seed;
};

template < int N, int M >
struct RandomInt
{
    static constexpr auto value = RandomGenerator< N + 1 >::value % M;
};

template < int N >
struct RandomChar
{
    static const char value = static_cast< char >(1 + RandomInt< N, 0x7F - 1 >::value);
};

template < size_t N, int K, typename Char >
struct XorString
{
private:
    const char _key;
    std::array< Char, N + 1 > _encrypted;

    constexpr Char enc(Char c) const
    {
        return c ^ _key;
    }

    Char dec(Char c) const
    {
        return c ^ _key;
    }

public:
    template < size_t... Is >
    constexpr __forceinline XorString(const Char* str, std::index_sequence< Is... >) : _key(RandomChar< K >::value), _encrypted{ enc(str[Is])... }
    {
    }

    __forceinline decltype(auto) decrypt(void)
    {
        for (size_t i = 0; i < N; ++i) {
            _encrypted[i] = dec(_encrypted[i]);
        }
        _encrypted[N] = '\0';
        return _encrypted.data();
    }
};

//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
//-- Note: XorStr will __NOT__ work directly with functions like printf.
//         To work with them you need a wrapper function that takes a const char*
//         as parameter and passes it to printf and alike.
//
//         The Microsoft Compiler/Linker is not working correctly with variadic 
//         templates!
//  
//         Use the functions below or use std::cout (and similar)!
//--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

static auto w_printf = [](const char* fmt, ...) {
    va_list args;
    va_start(args, fmt);
    vprintf_s(fmt, args);
    va_end(args);
};

static auto w_printf_s = [](const char* fmt, ...) {
    va_list args;
    va_start(args, fmt);
    vprintf_s(fmt, args);
    va_end(args);
};

static auto w_sprintf = [](char* buf, const char* fmt, ...) {
    va_list args;
    va_start(args, fmt);
    vsprintf(buf, fmt, args);
    va_end(args);
};

static auto w_sprintf_ret = [](char* buf, const char* fmt, ...) {
    int ret;
    va_list args;
    va_start(args, fmt);
    ret = vsprintf(buf, fmt, args);
    va_end(args);
    return ret;
};

static auto w_sprintf_s = [](char* buf, size_t buf_size, const char* fmt, ...) {
    va_list args;
    va_start(args, fmt);
    vsprintf_s(buf, buf_size, fmt, args);
    va_end(args);
};

static auto w_sprintf_s_ret = [](char* buf, size_t buf_size, const char* fmt, ...) {
    int ret;
    va_list args;
    va_start(args, fmt);
    ret = vsprintf_s(buf, buf_size, fmt, args);
    va_end(args);
    return ret;
};

//Old functions before I found out about wrapper functions.
//#define XorStr( s ) ( XorCompileTime::XorString< sizeof(s)/sizeof(char) - 1, __COUNTER__, char >( s, std::make_index_sequence< sizeof(s)/sizeof(char) - 1>() ).decrypt() )
//#define XorStrW( s ) ( XorCompileTime::XorString< sizeof(s)/sizeof(wchar_t) - 1, __COUNTER__, wchar_t >( s, std::make_index_sequence< sizeof(s)/sizeof(wchar_t) - 1>() ).decrypt() )

//Wrapper functions to work in all functions below
#define XorStr( s ) []{ constexpr XorCompileTime::XorString< sizeof(s)/sizeof(char) - 1, __COUNTER__, char > expr( s, std::make_index_sequence< sizeof(s)/sizeof(char) - 1>() ); return expr; }().decrypt()
#define XorStrW( s ) []{ constexpr XorCompileTime::XorString< sizeof(s)/sizeof(wchar_t) - 1, __COUNTER__, wchar_t > expr( s, std::make_index_sequence< sizeof(s)/sizeof(wchar_t) - 1>() ); return expr; }().decrypt()

END_NAMESPACE

Upvotes: 0

tuket
tuket

Reputation: 3951

In this blog post it is used for simulating the defer statement of golang in C++11.

template <typename F>
struct privDefer {
    F f;
    privDefer(F f) : f(f) {}
    ~privDefer() { f(); }
};

template <typename F>
privDefer<F> defer_func(F f) {
    return privDefer<F>(f);
}

#define DEFER_1(x, y) x##y
#define DEFER_2(x, y) DEFER_1(x, y)
#define DEFER_3(x)    DEFER_2(x, __COUNTER__)
#define defer(code)   auto DEFER_3(_defer_) = defer_func([&](){code;})

Then you can do:

int main()
{
    FILE* file = open("file.txt");
    defer(fclose(file));

    // use the file here
    // ....
}

Upvotes: 2

JonS
JonS

Reputation: 651

I've used it for a driver shim layer, where I needed to make sure at least one physical driver was enabled.

For example:

#if defined( USE_DRIVER1 )
#include "driver1.h"
int xxx1 = __COUNTER__;
#endif
#if defined( USE_DRIVER2 )
#include "driver2.h"
int xxx2 = __COUNTER__;
#endif
#if __COUNTER__ < 1
#error Must enable at least one driver.
#endif

Upvotes: 2

Devolus
Devolus

Reputation: 22094

In our code we forgot to add testcases for some of our products. I implemented now some macros so we can assert at compile time that we have testcases for each product that we are adding or removing.

Upvotes: 0

user1143634
user1143634

Reputation:

It is used by Boost.Asio to implement stackless coroutines.

See this header file and examples.

Resulting coroutines look like this:

struct task : coroutine
{
  ...
  void operator()()
  {
    reenter (this)
    {
      while (... not finished ...)
      {
         ... do something ...
         yield;
         ... do some more ...
         yield;
       }
     }
   }
   ...
};

Upvotes: 3

Amos
Amos

Reputation: 3276

It's used in ClickHouse's metrics system.

namespace CurrentMetrics
{
    #define M(NAME) extern const Metric NAME = __COUNTER__;
        APPLY_FOR_METRICS(M)
    #undef M
    constexpr Metric END = __COUNTER__;

    std::atomic<Value> values[END] {};    /// Global variable, initialized by zeros.

    const char * getDescription(Metric event)
    {
        static const char * descriptions[] =
        {
        #define M(NAME) #NAME,
            APPLY_FOR_METRICS(M)
        #undef M
        };

        return descriptions[event];
    }

    Metric end() { return END; }
}

Upvotes: 1

cxwangyi
cxwangyi

Reputation: 701

A usage is in TensorFlow's REGISTER_KERNEL_BUILDER macro. Each TensorFlow Op could have one or more kernels as its implementations. These kernels are registered with a registrar. The registration of a kernel is done by defining a global variable -- the constructor of the variable can do the registration. Here the authors use __COUNTER__ to give each global variable a unique name.

#define REGISTER_KERNEL_BUILDER(kernel_builder, ...) \
  REGISTER_KERNEL_BUILDER_UNIQ_HELPER(__COUNTER__, kernel_builder, __VA_ARGS__)

#define REGISTER_KERNEL_BUILDER_UNIQ_HELPER(ctr, kernel_builder, ...) \
  REGISTER_KERNEL_BUILDER_UNIQ(ctr, kernel_builder, __VA_ARGS__)

#define REGISTER_KERNEL_BUILDER_UNIQ(ctr, kernel_builder, ...)          \
  static ::tensorflow::kernel_factory::OpKernelRegistrar                \
  registrar__body__##ctr##__object(                                 \
      SHOULD_REGISTER_OP_KERNEL(#__VA_ARGS__)                       \
      ? ::tensorflow::register_kernel::kernel_builder.Build()   \
      : nullptr,                                                \
      #__VA_ARGS__, [](::tensorflow::OpKernelConstruction* context) \
            -> ::tensorflow::OpKernel* {                \
              return new __VA_ARGS__(context);          \
            });

Upvotes: 3

JamieH
JamieH

Reputation: 1297

It's used in the xCover code coverage library, to mark the lines that execution passes through, to find ones that are not covered.

Upvotes: 13

Potatoswatter
Potatoswatter

Reputation: 137900

I'm interested to learn whether anyone's ever used it,

Yes, but as you can see from many examples in this Q&A, __LINE__, which is standardized, would also be sufficient in most cases.

__COUNTER__ is only really necessary in cases where the count must increase by one each time, or it must have continuity over several #include files.

and whether it's something that would be worth standardising?

__COUNTER__, unlike __LINE__, is very dangerous because it depends on which header files are included and what order. If two .cpp files (translation units) include a header file that use __COUNTER__, but the header file obtains different count sequences in the different instances, they may use different definitions of the same thing and violate the one-definition rule.

One-definition rule violations are very difficult to catch and potentially create bugs and security risks. The few use-cases of __COUNTER__ don't really outweigh the downside and lack of scalability.

Even if you never ship code that uses __COUNTER__, it can be useful when prototyping an enumeration sequence, saving you the trouble of assigning names before the membership is concrete.

Upvotes: 12

BSalita
BSalita

Reputation: 8961

__COUNTER__ is guaranteed to be unique unlike __LINE__. Some compilers allow __LINE__ to be reset. #include files will also reset __LINE__.

Upvotes: 0

thegreendroid
thegreendroid

Reputation: 3328

I intend to use __COUNTER__ to give every file in our codebase a unique identifier, so that that unique code can be used in logging ASSERTs in an embedded system.

This method is much more efficient than using strings to store filenames (using __FILE__), especially on an embedded system with tiny ROM. I thought about the idea whilst I was reading this article - Assert Yourself on Embedded.com. It's a shame that it only works with GCC-based compilers though.

Upvotes: -2

user158649
user158649

Reputation:

__COUNTER__ is useful anywhere you need a unique name. I have used it extensively for RAII style locks and stacks. Consider:

struct TLock
{
  void Lock();
  void Unlock();
}
g_Lock1, g_Lock2;

struct TLockUse
{
  TLockUse( TLock &lock ):m_Lock(lock){ m_Lock.Lock(); }
  ~TLockUse(){ m_Lock.Unlock(); }

  TLock &m_Lock;
};

void DoSomething()
{
  TLockUse lock_use1( g_Lock1 );
  TLockUse lock_use2( g_Lock2 );
  // ...
}

It gets tedious to name the lock uses, and can even become a source of errors if they're not all declared at the top of a block. How do you know if you're on lock_use4 or lock_use11? It's also needless pollution of the namespace - I never need to refer to the lock use objects by name. So I use __COUNTER__:

#define CONCAT_IMPL( x, y ) x##y
#define MACRO_CONCAT( x, y ) CONCAT_IMPL( x, y )
#define USE_LOCK( lock ) TLockUse MACRO_CONCAT( LockUse, __COUNTER__ )( lock )

void DoSomething2()
{
  USE_LOCK( g_Lock1 );
  USE_LOCK( g_Lock2 );
  // ...
}

But don't get hung up on the fact I called the objects locks - any function(s) that need to get called in matching pairs fit this pattern. You might even have multiple uses on the same "lock" in a given block.

Upvotes: 68

Leonard
Leonard

Reputation: 13767

If I'm understanding the functionality correctly, I wished I had that functionality when I was working in Perl, adding an Event Logging function into an existing GUI. I wanted to ensure that the needed hand testing (sigh) gave us complete coverage, so I logged every test point to a file, and logging a __counter__ value made it easy to see what was missing in the coverage. As it was, I hand coded the equivalent.

Upvotes: 3

Michael Burr
Michael Burr

Reputation: 340366

I've used it in a compile-time assertion macro to have the macro create a name for a typedef that will be unique. See

if you want the gory details.

Upvotes: 14

Related Questions