Related
I am curious if any of you can think of a way upon macro expansion to repeat the macro itself. Here is an incredibly small scale version of an overall bigger problem:
#include<stdio.h>
#define LETTERS\
X(A)\
X(B)\
X(C)\
X(D)
#define X(L) #L
int main(int nargs,char** args)
{
printf("%s\n",LETTERS);
return 0;
}
Output: ABCD
Desired output: AABCD BABCD CABCD DABCD
The desired output is clearly similar to a nested (N^2) loop over whatever input data.
The stringification doesn't matter, it's only there for compilation.
There are some obvious and some not so obvious solutions to the desired output.
One is to make a complete copy of the macro, then between each X element, you simply refer to the copy. This would be wasteful and I don't want to do it. Obviously you can't refer to the macro itself due to recursion. I have made many attempts to find a decent solution, and won't list all of them as it would take up way too much time. I am open to solutions that use other macros to repeat or expand the original, or solutions that use janky forms of recursion.
#include<stdio.h>
#define LETTERS_COPY\
X(A)\
X(B)\
X(C)\
X(D)
#define LETTERS\
X(A)\
LETTERS_COPY\
X(B)\
LETTERS_COPY\
X(C)\
LETTERS_COPY\
X(D)\
LETTERS_COPY
#define X(L) #L
int main(int nargs,char** args)
{
printf("%s\n",LETTERS);
return 0;
}
Again, this builds just fine and works, but requires a complete duplicate of the original data, interjecting itself between each X element.
If you use an iterating macro, like how one is defined in the P99 macro utility collection, then it becomes much easier to solve.
Since we intend to define an iterating macro, we don't need X-macros on the letters anymore.
#define LETTERS \
A \
,B \
,C \
,D
Below is a simplified iterating macro that supports up to 5 arguments. Hopefully you see how to extend the implementation if you need more.
#define XX(X, ...) \
XX_X(__VA_ARGS__, XX_5, XX_4, XX_3, XX_2, XX_1) \
(X, __VA_ARGS__)
#define XX_X(_1,_2,_3,_4,_5,X,...) X
#define XX_1(X, _) X(_)
#define XX_2(X, _, ...) X(_) XX_1(X, __VA_ARGS__)
#define XX_3(X, _, ...) X(_) XX_2(X, __VA_ARGS__)
#define XX_4(X, _, ...) X(_) XX_3(X, __VA_ARGS__)
#define XX_5(X, _, ...) X(_) XX_4(X, __VA_ARGS__)
So, if you invoke XX(X, LETTERS), it will expand into the X-macro version of LETTERS you had before.
The magic of the XX() macro is the meta nature of the XX_X() macro, which selects the right numeric macro to use. The numeric macro is passed in reverse order to the XX_X() macro when it is invoked by XX(). This makes it so that XX_X() selects a lower numeric macro if __VA_ARGS__ contains fewer arguments.
Now, we create a macro to turn the argument into a string:
#define STR(X) STR_(X)
#define STR_(X) #X
This allows you to easily create the string with all your letters.
And printing your iterative output just needs another macro.
int main () {
const char *letters = XX(STR, LETTERS);
#define LETTERS_PRINT(X) printf("%s%s\n", #X, letters);
XX(LETTERS_PRINT, LETTERS)
}
We see that the solution applies XX() twice. Once to create the string of all your letters. Once to create the output, which is prepending each letter to the combined letters.
Try it online!
For anyone wondering, the best I could do was make a second X macro that takes 2 args, and the outer list becomes a function macro that takes a single arg. This lets you pass data to the list, and to the second x macro, while still being able to unpack either X macro however you like.
#include<stdio.h>
#define _CAT(A,B) A##B
#define CAT(A,B) _CAT(A,B)
#define _STR(S) #S
#define STR(S) _STR(S)
#define LETTERS(L)\
XX(L,X(A))\
XX(L,X(B))\
XX(L,X(C))\
XX(L,X(D))
int main(int nargs,char** args)
{
#define X(L) L
#define XX(L1,L2) STR(CAT(L1,L2))
printf("%s\n",LETTERS(A));
printf("%s\n",LETTERS(B));
printf("%s\n",LETTERS(C));
printf("%s\n",LETTERS(D));
#undef XX
#undef X
return 0;
}
Suppose I have function bshow() with signature
void bshow(int arg0, int arg1, int arg2);
but for arbitrary reasons I want to implement it as a macro.
Furthermore, I want the function have default arguments
int arg0=0x10;
int arg1=0x11;
int arg2=0x12;
I've already done this for the case that bshow() is a function, using the standard tricks.
But how can I do it as a macro?
Eg. suppose I have a macro nargs() that uses the C Preprocessor to count the number of arguments. Eg.
nargs() // get replaced by 0 by the preprocessor
nargs(a) // get replaced by 1 by the preprocessor
nargs(a,b) // get replaced by 2 by the preprocessor
I'd like to do something like (which doesn't work):
#define arg0_get(a0,...) a0
#define arg1_get(a0,a1,...) a1
#define arg2_get(a0,a1,a2,...) a2
#define bshow(...) do{ \
int arg0=0x10; if(0<nargs(__VA_ARGS__)) arg0 = arg0_get(__VA_ARGS__); \
int arg1=0x11; if(1<nargs(__VA_ARGS__)) arg1 = arg1_get(__VA_ARGS__); \
int arg2=0x12; if(2<nargs(__VA_ARGS__)) arg2 = arg2_get(__VA_ARGS__); \
/* do stuff here */ \
}while(0)
Actually I've already implemented the bshow() function as a macro, as follows (here it has the actual number of arguments):
#define __bshow(bdim,data, nbits,ncols,base)({ \
bdim,data, nbits,ncols,base; \
putchar(0x0a); \
printf("nbits %d\n",nbits); \
printf("ncols %d\n",ncols); \
printf("base %d\n",base); \
})
#define _bshow(bdim,data, nbits,ncols,base, ...) __bshow(bdim,data, nbits,ncols,base)
#define bshow(...) \
if( 2==nargs(__VA_ARGS__)) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__, 32,24,16,0,__VA_ARGS__); \
else if(3==nargs(__VA_ARGS__)) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__, 24,16,0,__VA_ARGS__); \
else if(4==nargs(__VA_ARGS__)) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__, 16,0,__VA_ARGS__); \
else if(5==nargs(__VA_ARGS__)) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__, 0,__VA_ARGS__); \
// test
bshow(0,1);
bshow(0,1, 10);
bshow(0,1, 10,11);
bshow(0,1, 10,11,12);
EDIT:
The proposed solution doesn't have the intended effect because it seems to "instantiate" all instances of the macro, which in general has unintended consequences.
But I wonder if there's a more elegant way to do it.
It'd also be nice to abstract away the entire construction inside its own macro, so that one can apply it to other functions easily, as opposed to having to write the boilerplate manually for each function/macro.
Also this wasn't too helpful.
I found a nice answer.
What you do is you call the vfn() macro, which is (I think) a higher-order macro that returns a macro that returns the token concatenated with the number of args (in hex base, no 0-padding) and then evaluates it at the args. Or something.
Eg. supposed you want to overload a macro called bshow(). You #define the macro bshow() as #define bshow() vfn(bshow,__VA_ARGS__), and you define 1 instance of bshow for each argument count (eg. #define bshow0(...), for 0 arguments, #define bshow1(...) for 1 argument, #define bshow2(...) for 2 arguments, etc.). So now, eg., bshow(0,1) returns bshow2() (because you called it with 2 arguments) evaluated at (0,1), which is _bshow(0,1, 16,32,16), and then _bshow(0,1, 16,32,16) gets evaluated too. You can check the final preprocessor output by running gcc with the -E option, but the intermediate steps are hard to understand (for me).
You also need to decide on the mandatory args and the optional args.
That's almost all I (sort of) understand about what's going on, although I did upload a YT tutorial a while ago on how the argument-counting works.
// ----------------------------------------------------------------
// library
#define __nargs100__(a00,a01,a02,a03,a04,a05,a06,a07,a08,a09,a0a,a0b,a0c,a0d,a0e,a0f,a10,a11,a12,a13,a14,a15,a16,a17,a18,a19,a1a,a1b,a1c,a1d,a1e,a1f,a20,a21,a22,a23,a24,a25,a26,a27,a28,a29,a2a,a2b,a2c,a2d,a2e,a2f,a30,a31,a32,a33,a34,a35,a36,a37,a38,a39,a3a,a3b,a3c,a3d,a3e,a3f,a40,a41,a42,a43,a44,a45,a46,a47,a48,a49,a4a,a4b,a4c,a4d,a4e,a4f,a50,a51,a52,a53,a54,a55,a56,a57,a58,a59,a5a,a5b,a5c,a5d,a5e,a5f,a60,a61,a62,a63,a64,a65,a66,a67,a68,a69,a6a,a6b,a6c,a6d,a6e,a6f,a70,a71,a72,a73,a74,a75,a76,a77,a78,a79,a7a,a7b,a7c,a7d,a7e,a7f,a80,a81,a82,a83,a84,a85,a86,a87,a88,a89,a8a,a8b,a8c,a8d,a8e,a8f,a90,a91,a92,a93,a94,a95,a96,a97,a98,a99,a9a,a9b,a9c,a9d,a9e,a9f,aa0,aa1,aa2,aa3,aa4,aa5,aa6,aa7,aa8,aa9,aaa,aab,aac,aad,aae,aaf,ab0,ab1,ab2,ab3,ab4,ab5,ab6,ab7,ab8,ab9,aba,abb,abc,abd,abe,abf,ac0,ac1,ac2,ac3,ac4,ac5,ac6,ac7,ac8,ac9,aca,acb,acc,acd,ace,acf,ad0,ad1,ad2,ad3,ad4,ad5,ad6,ad7,ad8,ad9,ada,adb,adc,add,ade,adf,ae0,ae1,ae2,ae3,ae4,ae5,ae6,ae7,ae8,ae9,aea,aeb,aec,aed,aee,aef,af0,af1,af2,af3,af4,af5,af6,af7,af8,af9,afa,afb,afc,afd,afe,aff,a100,...) a100
#define __nargs__(...) __nargs100__(,##__VA_ARGS__, ff,fe,fd,fc,fb,fa,f9,f8,f7,f6,f5,f4,f3,f2,f1,f0,ef,ee,ed,ec,eb,ea,e9,e8,e7,e6,e5,e4,e3,e2,e1,e0,df,de,dd,dc,db,da,d9,d8,d7,d6,d5,d4,d3,d2,d1,d0,cf,ce,cd,cc,cb,ca,c9,c8,c7,c6,c5,c4,c3,c2,c1,c0,bf,be,bd,bc,bb,ba,b9,b8,b7,b6,b5,b4,b3,b2,b1,b0,af,ae,ad,ac,ab,aa,a9,a8,a7,a6,a5,a4,a3,a2,a1,a0,9f,9e,9d,9c,9b,9a,99,98,97,96,95,94,93,92,91,90,8f,8e,8d,8c,8b,8a,89,88,87,86,85,84,83,82,81,80,7f,7e,7d,7c,7b,7a,79,78,77,76,75,74,73,72,71,70,6f,6e,6d,6c,6b,6a,69,68,67,66,65,64,63,62,61,60,5f,5e,5d,5c,5b,5a,59,58,57,56,55,54,53,52,51,50,4f,4e,4d,4c,4b,4a,49,48,47,46,45,44,43,42,41,40,3f,3e,3d,3c,3b,3a,39,38,37,36,35,34,33,32,31,30,2f,2e,2d,2c,2b,2a,29,28,27,26,25,24,23,22,21,20,1f,1e,1d,1c,1b,1a,19,18,17,16,15,14,13,12,11,10,f,e,d,c,b,a,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,0)
#define __vfn(name, n) name##n
#define _vfn( name, n) __vfn(name, n)
#define vfn( fn, ...) _vfn(fn, __nargs__(__VA_ARGS__))(__VA_ARGS__)
// ----------------------------------------------------------------
// example
// backend: actual implementation, 2 mandatory args, 3 optional args
#define _bshow(bdim,data, ncols,nbits,base)({ \
/* do stuff here */ \
})
// "frontend", default arguments get implemented here. the suffix is the number of arguments, in hexadecimal base
#define bshow2(...) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__, 16,32,16)
#define bshow3(...) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__, 32,16)
#define bshow4(...) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__, 16)
#define bshow5(...) _bshow(__VA_ARGS__)
#define bshow(...) vfn(bshow,__VA_ARGS__)
// test
bshow(0x100,data0);
bshow(0x100,data0, 14);
bshow(0x100,data0, 12,16);
bshow(0x100,data0, 10, 8,2);
I am having trouble getting this macro expanison right
#define foo Hello
#ifdef foo
#define wrapper(x) foo ## x
#else
#define wrapper(x) boo ## x
#endif
calling:
wrapper(_world)
I would like the result of
Hello_world
however, the macro is treating the "foo" define as a literal, and thus giving
foo_world
Can someone point out my mistake?
Thanks
I would recommend gnu-cpp-manual which clearly explains how macros are expanded.
Macro arguments are completely macro-expanded before they are substituted into a macro body, unless they(macro arguments) are stringified or pasted with other tokens (by the macro function that is directly applied to).
For example:
If an argument is stringified or concatenated, the prescan does not occur.
#define AFTERX(x) X_ ## x
#define XAFTERX(x) AFTERX(x)
#define TABLESIZE 1024
#define BUFSIZE TABLESIZE
AFTERX(BUFSIZE) => X_BUFSIZE: since AFTERX is to concatenate argument with prefix, its argument is not expanded, remaining BUFSIZE.
XAFTERX(BUFSIZE) => X_1024: XAFTERX does not do concatenation directly, so BUFSIZE will be expanded first.
Generally, arguments are scanned twice to expand macro called in them.
--- edit ---
So the better practice is: (code from QEMU source)
#ifndef glue
#define xglue(x, y) x ## y
#define glue(x, y) xglue(x, y)
#define stringify(s) tostring(s)
#define tostring(s) #s
#endif
glue(x,y) will concatenate x and y with both already expanded.
Is there some way of getting optional parameters with C++ Macros? Some sort of overloading would be nice too.
Here's one way to do it. It uses the list of arguments twice, first to form the name of the helper macro, and then to pass the arguments to that helper macro. It uses a standard trick to count the number of arguments to a macro.
enum
{
plain = 0,
bold = 1,
italic = 2
};
void PrintString(const char* message, int size, int style)
{
}
#define PRINT_STRING_1_ARGS(message) PrintString(message, 0, 0)
#define PRINT_STRING_2_ARGS(message, size) PrintString(message, size, 0)
#define PRINT_STRING_3_ARGS(message, size, style) PrintString(message, size, style)
#define GET_4TH_ARG(arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, ...) arg4
#define PRINT_STRING_MACRO_CHOOSER(...) \
GET_4TH_ARG(__VA_ARGS__, PRINT_STRING_3_ARGS, \
PRINT_STRING_2_ARGS, PRINT_STRING_1_ARGS, )
#define PRINT_STRING(...) PRINT_STRING_MACRO_CHOOSER(__VA_ARGS__)(__VA_ARGS__)
int main(int argc, char * const argv[])
{
PRINT_STRING("Hello, World!");
PRINT_STRING("Hello, World!", 18);
PRINT_STRING("Hello, World!", 18, bold);
return 0;
}
This makes it easier for the caller of the macro, but not the writer.
With great respect to Derek Ledbetter for his answer — and with apologies for reviving an old question.
Getting an understanding of what it was doing and picking up elsewhere on the ability to preceed the __VA_ARGS__ with ## allowed me to come up with a variation...
// The multiple macros that you would need anyway [as per: Crazy Eddie]
#define XXX_0() <code for no arguments>
#define XXX_1(A) <code for one argument>
#define XXX_2(A,B) <code for two arguments>
#define XXX_3(A,B,C) <code for three arguments>
#define XXX_4(A,B,C,D) <code for four arguments>
// The interim macro that simply strips the excess and ends up with the required macro
#define XXX_X(x,A,B,C,D,FUNC, ...) FUNC
// The macro that the programmer uses
#define XXX(...) XXX_X(,##__VA_ARGS__,\
XXX_4(__VA_ARGS__),\
XXX_3(__VA_ARGS__),\
XXX_2(__VA_ARGS__),\
XXX_1(__VA_ARGS__),\
XXX_0(__VA_ARGS__)\
)
For non-experts like me who stumble upon the answer, but can't quite see how it works, I'll step through the actual processing, starting with the following code...
XXX();
XXX(1);
XXX(1,2);
XXX(1,2,3);
XXX(1,2,3,4);
XXX(1,2,3,4,5); // Not actually valid, but included to show the process
Becomes...
XXX_X(, XXX_4(), XXX_3(), XXX_2(), XXX_1(), XXX_0() );
XXX_X(, 1, XXX_4(1), XXX_3(1), XXX_2(1), XXX_1(1), XXX_0(1) );
XXX_X(, 1, 2, XXX_4(1,2), XXX_3(1,2), XXX_2(1,2), XXX_1(1,2), XXX_0(1,2) );
XXX_X(, 1, 2, 3, XXX_4(1,2,3), XXX_3(1,2,3), XXX_2(1,2,3), XXX_1(1,2,3), XXX_0(1,2,3) );
XXX_X(, 1, 2, 3, 4, XXX_4(1,2,3,4), XXX_3(1,2,3,4), XXX_2(1,2,3,4), XXX_1(1,2,3,4), XXX_0(1,2,3,4) );
XXX_X(, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, XXX_4(1,2,3,4,5), XXX_3(1,2,3,4,5), XXX_2(1,2,3,4,5), XXX_1(1,2,3,4,5), XXX_0(1,2,3,4,5) );
Which becomes just the sixth argument...
XXX_0();
XXX_1(1);
XXX_2(1,2);
XXX_3(1,2,3);
XXX_4(1,2,3,4);
5;
PS: Remove the #define for XXX_0 to get a compile error [ie: if a no-argument option is not allowed].
PPS: Would be nice to have the invalid situations (eg: 5) be something that gives a clearer compilation error to the programmer!
PPPS: I'm not an expert, so I'm very happy to hear comments (good, bad or other)!
With greatest respect to Derek Ledbetter, David Sorkovsky, Syphorlate for their answers, together with the ingenious method to detect empty macro arguments by Jens Gustedt at
https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/detect-empty-macro-arguments/
finally I come out with something that incorporates all the tricks, so that the solution
Uses only standard C99 macros to achieve function overloading, no GCC/CLANG/MSVC extension involved (i.e., comma swallowing by the specific expression , ##__VA_ARGS__ for GCC/CLANG, and implicit swallowing by ##__VA_ARGS__ for MSVC). So feel free to pass the missing --std=c99 to your compiler if you wish =)
Works for zero argument, as well as unlimited number of arguments, if you expand it further to suit your needs
Works reasonably cross-platform, at least tested for
GNU/Linux + GCC (GCC 4.9.2 on CentOS 7.0 x86_64)
GNU/Linux + CLANG/LLVM, (CLANG/LLVM 3.5.0 on CentOS 7.0 x86_64)
OS X + Xcode, (XCode 6.1.1 on OS X Yosemite 10.10.1)
Windows + Visual Studio, (Visual Studio 2013 Update 4 on Windows 7 SP1 64 bits)
For the lazies, just skip to the very last of this post to copy the source. Below is the detailed explanation, which hopefully helps and inspires all people looking for the general __VA_ARGS__ solutions like me. =)
Here's how it goes. First define the user-visible overloaded "function", I named it create, and the related actual function definition realCreate, and the macro definitions with different number of arguments CREATE_2, CREATE_1, CREATE_0, as shown below:
#define create(...) MACRO_CHOOSER(__VA_ARGS__)(__VA_ARGS__)
void realCreate(int x, int y)
{
printf("(%d, %d)\n", x, y);
}
#define CREATE_2(x, y) realCreate(x, y)
#define CREATE_1(x) CREATE_2(x, 0)
#define CREATE_0() CREATE_1(0)
The MACRO_CHOOSER(__VA_ARGS__) part ultimately resolves to the macro definition names, and the second (__VA_ARGS__) part comprises their parameter lists. So a user's call to create(10) resolves to CREATE_1(10), the CREATE_1 part comes from MACRO_CHOOSER(__VA_ARGS__), and the (10) part comes from the second (__VA_ARGS__).
The MACRO_CHOOSER uses the trick that, if __VA_ARGS__ is empty, the following expression is concatenated into a valid macro call by the preprocessor:
NO_ARG_EXPANDER __VA_ARGS__ () // simply shrinks to NO_ARG_EXPANDER()
Ingeniusly, we can define this resulting macro call as
#define NO_ARG_EXPANDER() ,,CREATE_0
Note the two commas, they are explained soon. The next useful macro is
#define MACRO_CHOOSER(...) CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(NO_ARG_EXPANDER __VA_ARGS__ ())
so the calls of
create();
create(10);
create(20, 20);
are actually expanded to
CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(,,CREATE_0)();
CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(NO_ARG_EXPANDER 10 ())(10);
CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(NO_ARG_EXPANDER 20, 20 ())(20, 20);
As the macro name suggests, we are to count number of arguments later. Here comes another trick: the preprocessor only does simple text replacement. It infers the number of arguments of a macro call merely from the number of commas it sees inside the parentheses. The actual "arguments" separated by commas need not to be of valid syntax. They can be any text. That's to say, in the above example, NO_ARG_EXPANDER 10 () is counted as 1 argument for the middle call. NO_ARG_EXPANDER 20 and 20 () are counted as 2 arguments for the bottom call respectively.
If we use the following helper macros to further expand them
##define CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(...) \
FUNC_RECOMPOSER((__VA_ARGS__, CREATE_2, CREATE_1, ))
#define FUNC_RECOMPOSER(argsWithParentheses) \
FUNC_CHOOSER argsWithParentheses
The trailing , after CREATE_1 is a work-around for GCC/CLANG, suppressing a (false positive) error saying that ISO C99 requires rest arguments to be used when passing -pedantic to your compiler. The FUNC_RECOMPOSER is a work-around for MSVC, or it can not count number of arguments (i.e., commas) inside the parentheses of macro calls correctly. The results are further resolved to
FUNC_CHOOSER (,,CREATE_0, CREATE_2, CREATE_1, )();
FUNC_CHOOSER (NO_ARG_EXPANDER 10 (), CREATE_2, CREATE_1, )(10);
FUNC_CHOOSER (NO_ARG_EXPANDER 20, 20 (), CREATE_2, CREATE_1, )(20, 20);
As the eagle-eyed you may have seen, the last only step we need is to employ a standard argument counting trick to finally pick the wanted macro version names:
#define FUNC_CHOOSER(_f1, _f2, _f3, ...) _f3
which resolves the results to
CREATE_0();
CREATE_1(10);
CREATE_2(20, 20);
and certainly gives us the desired, actual function calls:
realCreate(0, 0);
realCreate(10, 10);
realCreate(20, 20);
Putting all together, with some rearrangement of statements for better readability, the whole source of the 2-argument example is here:
#include <stdio.h>
void realCreate(int x, int y)
{
printf("(%d, %d)\n", x, y);
}
#define CREATE_2(x, y) realCreate(x, y)
#define CREATE_1(x) CREATE_2(x, 0)
#define CREATE_0() CREATE_1(0)
#define FUNC_CHOOSER(_f1, _f2, _f3, ...) _f3
#define FUNC_RECOMPOSER(argsWithParentheses) FUNC_CHOOSER argsWithParentheses
#define CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(...) FUNC_RECOMPOSER((__VA_ARGS__, CREATE_2, CREATE_1, ))
#define NO_ARG_EXPANDER() ,,CREATE_0
#define MACRO_CHOOSER(...) CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(NO_ARG_EXPANDER __VA_ARGS__ ())
#define create(...) MACRO_CHOOSER(__VA_ARGS__)(__VA_ARGS__)
int main()
{
create();
create(10);
create(20, 20);
//create(30, 30, 30); // Compilation error
return 0;
}
Although complicated, ugly, burdening the API developer, there comes a solution for overloading and setting optional parameters of C/C++ functions to us crazy people. The usage of the out-coming overloaded APIs become very enjoyable and pleasant. =)
If there is any further possible simplification of this approach, please do let me know at
https://github.com/jason-deng/C99FunctionOverload
Again special thanks to all of the brilliant people that inspired and led me to achieve this piece of work! =)
C++ macros haven't changed from C. Since C didn't have overloading and default arguments for functions, it certainly didn't have them for macros. So to answer your question: no, those features don't exist for macros. Your only option is to define multiple macros with different names (or not use macros at all).
As a sidenote: In C++ it's generally considered good practice to move away from macros as much as possible. If you need features like this, there's a good chance you're overusing macros.
For anyone painfully searching some VA_NARGS solution that works with Visual C++. Following macro worked for me flawlessly(also with zero parameters!) in visual c++ express 2010:
#define VA_NUM_ARGS_IMPL(_1,_2,_3,_4,_5,_6,_7,_8,_9,_10,_11,_12,_13,_14,_15,_16,_17,_18,_19,_20,_21,_22,_23,_24,N,...) N
#define VA_NUM_ARGS_IMPL_(tuple) VA_NUM_ARGS_IMPL tuple
#define VA_NARGS(...) bool(#__VA_ARGS__) ? (VA_NUM_ARGS_IMPL_((__VA_ARGS__, 24,23,22,21,20,19,18,17,16,15,14,13,12,11,10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1))) : 0
If you want a macro with optional parameters you can do:
//macro selection(vc++)
#define SELMACRO_IMPL(_1,_2,_3, N,...) N
#define SELMACRO_IMPL_(tuple) SELMACRO_IMPL tuple
#define mymacro1(var1) var1
#define mymacro2(var1,var2) var2*var1
#define mymacro3(var1,var2,var3) var1*var2*var3
#define mymacro(...) SELMACRO_IMPL_((__VA_ARGS__, mymacro3(__VA_ARGS__), mymacro2(__VA_ARGS__), mymacro1(__VA_ARGS__)))
That worked for me aswell in vc. But it doesn't work for zero parameters.
int x=99;
x=mymacro(2);//2
x=mymacro(2,2);//4
x=mymacro(2,2,2);//8
gcc/g++ supports varargs macros but I don't think this is standard, so use it at your own risk.
More concise version of Derek Ledbetter's code:
enum
{
plain = 0,
bold = 1,
italic = 2
};
void PrintString(const char* message = NULL, int size = 0, int style = 0)
{
}
#define PRINT_STRING(...) PrintString(__VA_ARGS__)
int main(int argc, char * const argv[])
{
PRINT_STRING("Hello, World!");
PRINT_STRING("Hello, World!", 18);
PRINT_STRING("Hello, World!", 18, bold);
return 0;
}
#include <stdio.h>
#define PP_NARG(...) \
PP_NARG_(__VA_ARGS__,PP_RSEQ_N())
#define PP_NARG_(...) \
PP_ARG_N(__VA_ARGS__)
#define PP_ARG_N( \
_1, _2, _3, _4, _5, _6, _7, _8, _9,_10, \
_11,_12,_13,_14,_15,_16,_17,_18,_19,_20, \
_21,_22,_23,_24,_25,_26,_27,_28,_29,_30, \
_31,_32,_33,_34,_35,_36,_37,_38,_39,_40, \
_41,_42,_43,_44,_45,_46,_47,_48,_49,_50, \
_51,_52,_53,_54,_55,_56,_57,_58,_59,_60, \
_61,_62,_63,N,...) N
#define PP_RSEQ_N() \
63,62,61,60, \
59,58,57,56,55,54,53,52,51,50, \
49,48,47,46,45,44,43,42,41,40, \
39,38,37,36,35,34,33,32,31,30, \
29,28,27,26,25,24,23,22,21,20, \
19,18,17,16,15,14,13,12,11,10, \
9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,0
#define PP_CONCAT(a,b) PP_CONCAT_(a,b)
#define PP_CONCAT_(a,b) a ## b
#define THINK(...) PP_CONCAT(THINK_, PP_NARG(__VA_ARGS__))(__VA_ARGS__)
#define THINK_0() THINK_1("sector zz9 plural z alpha")
#define THINK_1(location) THINK_2(location, 42)
#define THINK_2(location,answer) THINK_3(location, answer, "deep thought")
#define THINK_3(location,answer,computer) \
printf ("The answer is %d. This was calculated by %s, and a computer to figure out what this"
" actually means will be build in %s\n", (answer), (computer), (location))
int
main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
THINK (); /* On compilers other than GCC you have to call with least one non-default argument */
}
DISCLAIMER: Mostly harmless.
As a big fan of horrible macro monsters, I wanted to expand on Jason Deng's answer and make it actually usable. (For better or worse.) The original is not very nice to use because you need to modify the big alphabet soup every time you want to make a new macro and it's even worse if you need different amount of arguments.
So I made a version with these features:
0 argument case works
1 to 16 arguments without any modifications to the messy part
Easy to write more macro functions
Tested in gcc 10, clang 9, Visual Studio 2017
Currently I just made 16 argument maximum, but if you need more (really now? you're just getting silly...) you can edit FUNC_CHOOSER and CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT, then add some commas to NO_ARG_EXPANDER.
Please see Jason Deng's excellent answer for more details on the implementation, but I'll just put the code here:
#include <stdio.h>
void realCreate(int x, int y)
{
printf("(%d, %d)\n", x, y);
}
// This part you put in some library header:
#define FUNC_CHOOSER(_f0, _f1, _f2, _f3, _f4, _f5, _f6, _f7, _f8, _f9, _f10, _f11, _f12, _f13, _f14, _f15, _f16, ...) _f16
#define FUNC_RECOMPOSER(argsWithParentheses) FUNC_CHOOSER argsWithParentheses
#define CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(F, ...) FUNC_RECOMPOSER((__VA_ARGS__, \
F##_16, F##_15, F##_14, F##_13, F##_12, F##_11, F##_10, F##_9, F##_8,\
F##_7, F##_6, F##_5, F##_4, F##_3, F##_2, F##_1, ))
#define NO_ARG_EXPANDER(FUNC) ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,FUNC ## _0
#define MACRO_CHOOSER(FUNC, ...) CHOOSE_FROM_ARG_COUNT(FUNC, NO_ARG_EXPANDER __VA_ARGS__ (FUNC))
#define MULTI_MACRO(FUNC, ...) MACRO_CHOOSER(FUNC, __VA_ARGS__)(__VA_ARGS__)
// When you need to make a macro with default arguments, use this:
#define create(...) MULTI_MACRO(CREATE, __VA_ARGS__)
#define CREATE_0() CREATE_1(0)
#define CREATE_1(x) CREATE_2(x, 0)
#define CREATE_2(x, y) \
do { \
/* put whatever code you want in the last macro */ \
realCreate(x, y); \
} while(0)
int main()
{
create();
create(10);
create(20, 20);
//create(30, 30, 30); // Compilation error
return 0;
}
That's not really what the preprocessor is designed for.
That said, if you want to enter into the area of seriously challenging macro programming with a modicum of readability, you should take a look at the Boost preprocessor library. After all, it wouldn't be C++ if there weren't three completely Turing compatible levels of programming (preprocessor, template metaprogramming, and base level C++)!
#define MY_MACRO_3(X,Y,Z) ...
#define MY_MACRO_2(X,Y) MY_MACRO(X,Y,5)
#define MY_MACRO_1(X) MY_MACRO(X,42,5)
You know at the point of call how many args you're going to pass in so there's really no need for overloading.
You can use BOOST_PP_OVERLOAD from a boost library.
Example from official boost doc:
#include <boost/preprocessor/facilities/overload.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/cat.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/facilities/empty.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/arithmetic/add.hpp>
#define MACRO_1(number) MACRO_2(number,10)
#define MACRO_2(number1,number2) BOOST_PP_ADD(number1,number2)
#if !BOOST_PP_VARIADICS_MSVC
#define MACRO_ADD_NUMBERS(...) BOOST_PP_OVERLOAD(MACRO_,__VA_ARGS__)(__VA_ARGS__)
#else
// or for Visual C++
#define MACRO_ADD_NUMBERS(...) \
BOOST_PP_CAT(BOOST_PP_OVERLOAD(MACRO_,__VA_ARGS__)(__VA_ARGS__),BOOST_PP_EMPTY())
#endif
MACRO_ADD_NUMBERS(5) // output is 15
MACRO_ADD_NUMBERS(3,6) // output is 9
Depending on what you need, you could do it with var args with macros. Now, optional parameters or macro overloading, there is no such thing.
Not directly answering the question, but using the same trick as David Sorkovsky answer and giving a clear example of how to build complex macros.
Just compile this with g++ -E test.cpp -o test && cat test:
// #define GET_FIRST_ARG_0_ARGS(default) (default)
// #define GET_FIRST_ARG_1_ARGS(default, a) (a)
// #define GET_FIRST_ARG_2_ARGS(default, a, b) (a)
// #define GET_FIRST_ARG_3_ARGS(default, a, b, c) (a)
// #define GET_FIRST_ARG_4_ARGS(default, a, b, c, d) (a)
#define GET_FIRST_ARG_MACROS(default, a, b, c, d, macro, ...) macro
#define GET_FIRST_ARG(default, ...) GET_FIRST_ARG_MACROS( \
,##__VA_ARGS__, \
GET_FIRST_ARG_4_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_3_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_2_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_1_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_0_ARGS(default, ##__VA_ARGS__), \
)
"0,"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0);
"0,1"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1);
"0,1,2"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2);
"0,1,2,3"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2,3);
"0,1,2,3,4"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2,3,4);
To see the output:
# 1 "test.cpp"
# 1 "<built-in>"
# 1 "<command-line>"
# 1 "/usr/x86_64-linux-gnu/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3
# 1 "<command-line>" 2
# 1 "test.cpp"
# 16 "test.cpp"
"0,"; GET_FIRST_ARG_0_ARGS(0);
"0,1"; GET_FIRST_ARG_1_ARGS(0, 1);
"0,1,2"; GET_FIRST_ARG_2_ARGS(0, 1,2);
"0,1,2,3"; GET_FIRST_ARG_3_ARGS(0, 1,2,3);
"0,1,2,3,4"; GET_FIRST_ARG_4_ARGS(0, 1,2,3,4);
Now, a full working program would be:
#include <iostream>
#define GET_FIRST_ARG_0_ARGS(default) (default)
#define GET_FIRST_ARG_1_ARGS(default, a) (a)
#define GET_FIRST_ARG_2_ARGS(default, a, b) (a)
#define GET_FIRST_ARG_3_ARGS(default, a, b, c) (a)
#define GET_FIRST_ARG_4_ARGS(default, a, b, c, d) (a)
#define GET_FIRST_ARG_MACROS(default, a, b, c, d, macro, ...) macro
#define GET_FIRST_ARG(default, ...) GET_FIRST_ARG_MACROS( \
,##__VA_ARGS__, \
GET_FIRST_ARG_4_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_3_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_2_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_1_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_FIRST_ARG_0_ARGS(default, ##__VA_ARGS__), \
)
int main(int argc, char const *argv[]) {
"0,"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0);
"0,1"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1);
"0,1,2"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2);
"0,1,2,3"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2,3);
"0,1,2,3,4"; GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2,3,4);
std::cerr << "0, == " << GET_FIRST_ARG(0) << std::endl;
std::cerr << "0,1 == " << GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1) << std::endl;
std::cerr << "0,1,2 == " << GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2) << std::endl;
std::cerr << "0,1,2,3 == " << GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2,3) << std::endl;
std::cerr << "0,1,2,3,4 == " << GET_FIRST_ARG(0,1,2,3,4) << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Which would output the following by being compiled with g++ test.cpp -o test && ./test:
0, == 0
0,1 == 1
0,1,2 == 1
0,1,2,3 == 1
0,1,2,3,4 == 1
Note: It is important to use () around the macro contents as #define GET_FIRST_ARG_1_ARGS(default, a) (a) to not break in ambiguous expressions when a is just not a integer.
Extra macro for second argument:
#define GET_SECOND_ARG_0_ARGS(default) (default)
#define GET_SECOND_ARG_1_ARGS(default, a) (default)
#define GET_SECOND_ARG_2_ARGS(default, a, b) (b)
#define GET_SECOND_ARG_3_ARGS(default, a, b, c) (b)
#define GET_SECOND_ARG_4_ARGS(default, a, b, c, d) (b)
#define GET_SECOND_ARG_MACROS(default, a, b, c, d, macro, ...) macro
#define GET_SECOND_ARG(default, ...) GET_SECOND_ARG_MACROS( \
,##__VA_ARGS__, \
GET_SECOND_ARG_4_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_SECOND_ARG_3_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_SECOND_ARG_2_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_SECOND_ARG_1_ARGS(default, __VA_ARGS__), \
GET_SECOND_ARG_0_ARGS(default, ##__VA_ARGS__), \
)
None of the above examples (from Derek Ledbetter, David Sorkovsky, and Joe D) to count arguments with macros worked for me using Microsoft VCC 10. The __VA_ARGS__ argument is always considered as a single argument (token-izing it with ## or not), so the argument shifting in which those examples rely doesn't work.
So, short answer, as stated by many others above: no, you can't overload macros or use optional arguments on them.
There is a well-known problem with empty args for variadic macros in C99.
example:
#define FOO(...) printf(__VA_ARGS__)
#define BAR(fmt, ...) printf(fmt, __VA_ARGS__)
FOO("this works fine");
BAR("this breaks!");
The use of BAR() above is indeed incorrect according to the C99 standard, since it will expand to:
printf("this breaks!",);
Note the trailing comma - not workable.
Some compilers (eg: Visual Studio 2010) will quietly get rid of that trailing comma for you. Other compilers (eg: GCC) support putting ## in front of __VA_ARGS__, like so:
#define BAR(fmt, ...) printf(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
But is there a standards-compliant way to get this behavior?
Perhaps using multiple macros?
Right now, the ## version seems fairly well-supported (at least on my platforms), but I'd really rather use a standards-compliant solution.
Pre-emptive: I know I could just write a small function. I'm trying to do this using macros.
Edit: Here is an example (though simple) of why I would want to use BAR():
#define BAR(fmt, ...) printf(fmt "\n", ##__VA_ARGS__)
BAR("here is a log message");
BAR("here is a log message with a param: %d", 42);
This automatically adds a newline to my BAR() logging statements, assuming fmt is always a double-quoted C-string. It does NOT print the newline as a separate printf(), which is advantageous if the logging is line-buffered and coming from multiple sources asynchronously.
There is an argument counting trick that you can use.
Here is one standard-compliant way to implement the second BAR() example in jwd's question:
#include <stdio.h>
#define BAR(...) printf(FIRST(__VA_ARGS__) "\n" REST(__VA_ARGS__))
/* expands to the first argument */
#define FIRST(...) FIRST_HELPER(__VA_ARGS__, throwaway)
#define FIRST_HELPER(first, ...) first
/*
* if there's only one argument, expands to nothing. if there is more
* than one argument, expands to a comma followed by everything but
* the first argument. only supports up to 9 arguments but can be
* trivially expanded.
*/
#define REST(...) REST_HELPER(NUM(__VA_ARGS__), __VA_ARGS__)
#define REST_HELPER(qty, ...) REST_HELPER2(qty, __VA_ARGS__)
#define REST_HELPER2(qty, ...) REST_HELPER_##qty(__VA_ARGS__)
#define REST_HELPER_ONE(first)
#define REST_HELPER_TWOORMORE(first, ...) , __VA_ARGS__
#define NUM(...) \
SELECT_10TH(__VA_ARGS__, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE,\
TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, ONE, throwaway)
#define SELECT_10TH(a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7, a8, a9, a10, ...) a10
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
BAR("first test");
BAR("second test: %s", "a string");
return 0;
}
This same trick is used to:
count the number of arguments
expand differently depending on the number of arguments
append to __VA_ARGS__
Explanation
The strategy is to separate __VA_ARGS__ into the first argument and the rest (if any). This makes it possible to insert stuff after the first argument but before the second (if present).
FIRST()
This macro simply expands to the first argument, discarding the rest.
The implementation is straightforward. The throwaway argument ensures that FIRST_HELPER() gets two arguments, which is required because the ... needs at least one. With one argument, it expands as follows:
FIRST(firstarg)
FIRST_HELPER(firstarg, throwaway)
firstarg
With two or more, it expands as follows:
FIRST(firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg)
FIRST_HELPER(firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg, throwaway)
firstarg
REST()
This macro expands to everything but the first argument (including the comma after the first argument, if there is more than one argument).
The implementation of this macro is far more complicated. The general strategy is to count the number of arguments (one or more than one) and then expand to either REST_HELPER_ONE() (if only one argument given) or REST_HELPER_TWOORMORE() (if two or more arguments given). REST_HELPER_ONE() simply expands to nothing -- there are no arguments after the first, so the remaining arguments is the empty set. REST_HELPER_TWOORMORE() is also straightforward -- it expands to a comma followed by everything except the first argument.
The arguments are counted using the NUM() macro. This macro expands to ONE if only one argument is given, TWOORMORE if between two and nine arguments are given, and breaks if 10 or more arguments are given (because it expands to the 10th argument).
The NUM() macro uses the SELECT_10TH() macro to determine the number of arguments. As its name implies, SELECT_10TH() simply expands to its 10th argument. Because of the ellipsis, SELECT_10TH() needs to be passed at least 11 arguments (the standard says that there must be at least one argument for the ellipsis). This is why NUM() passes throwaway as the last argument (without it, passing one argument to NUM() would result in only 10 arguments being passed to SELECT_10TH(), which would violate the standard).
Selection of either REST_HELPER_ONE() or REST_HELPER_TWOORMORE() is done by concatenating REST_HELPER_ with the expansion of NUM(__VA_ARGS__) in REST_HELPER2(). Note that the purpose of REST_HELPER() is to ensure that NUM(__VA_ARGS__) is fully expanded before being concatenated with REST_HELPER_.
Expansion with one argument goes as follows:
REST(firstarg)
REST_HELPER(NUM(firstarg), firstarg)
REST_HELPER2(SELECT_10TH(firstarg, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, ONE, throwaway), firstarg)
REST_HELPER2(ONE, firstarg)
REST_HELPER_ONE(firstarg)
(empty)
Expansion with two or more arguments goes as follows:
REST(firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg)
REST_HELPER(NUM(firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg), firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg)
REST_HELPER2(SELECT_10TH(firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, TWOORMORE, ONE, throwaway), firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg)
REST_HELPER2(TWOORMORE, firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg)
REST_HELPER_TWOORMORE(firstarg, secondarg, thirdarg)
, secondarg, thirdarg
It is possible to avoid the use of GCC's ,##__VA_ARGS__ extension if you are willing to accept some hardcoded upper limit on the number of arguments you can pass to your variadic macro, as described in Richard Hansen's answer to this question. If you do not want to have any such limit, however, to the best of my knowledge it is not possible using only C99-specified preprocessor features; you must use some extension to the language. clang and icc have adopted this GCC extension, but MSVC has not.
Back in 2001 I wrote up the GCC extension for standardization (and the related extension that lets you use a name other than __VA_ARGS__ for the rest-parameter) in document N976, but that received no response whatsoever from the committee; I don't even know if anyone read it. In 2016 it was proposed again in N2023, and I encourage anyone who knows how that proposal is going to let us know in the comments.
Not a general solution, but in the case of printf you could append a newline like:
#define BAR_HELPER(fmt, ...) printf(fmt "\n%s", __VA_ARGS__)
#define BAR(...) BAR_HELPER(__VA_ARGS__, "")
I believe it ignores any extra args that aren't referenced in the format string. So you could probably even get away with:
#define BAR_HELPER(fmt, ...) printf(fmt "\n", __VA_ARGS__)
#define BAR(...) BAR_HELPER(__VA_ARGS__, 0)
I can't believe C99 was approved without a standard way to do this. AFAICT the problem exists in C++11 too.
There is a way to handle this specific case using something like Boost.Preprocessor. You can use BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE to check the size of the argument list, and then conditionaly expand to another macro. The one shortcoming of this is that it can't distinguish between 0 and 1 argument, and the reason for this becomes clear once you consider the following:
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE() // expands to 1
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(,) // expands to 2
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(,,) // expands to 3
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(a) // expands to 1
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(a,) // expands to 2
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(,b) // expands to 2
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(a,b) // expands to 2
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(a, ,c) // expands to 3
The empty macro argument list actually consists of one argument that happens to be empty.
In this case, we are lucky since your desired macro always has at least 1 argument, we can implement it as two "overload" macros:
#define BAR_0(fmt) printf(fmt "\n")
#define BAR_1(fmt, ...) printf(fmt "\n", __VA_ARGS__)
And then another macro to switch between them, such as:
#define BAR(...) \
BOOST_PP_CAT(BAR_, BOOST_PP_GREATER(
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(__VA_ARGS__), 1))(__VA_ARGS__) \
/**/
or
#define BAR(...) BOOST_PP_IIF( \
BOOST_PP_GREATER(BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(__VA_ARGS__), 1), \
BAR_1, BAR_0)(__VA_ARGS__) \
/**/
Whichever you find more readable (I prefer the first as it gives you a general form for overloading macros on the number of arguments).
It is also possible to do this with a single macro by accessing and mutating the variable arguments list, but it is way less readable, and is very specific to this problem:
#define BAR(...) printf( \
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_ELEM(0, __VA_ARGS__) "\n" \
BOOST_PP_COMMA_IF( \
BOOST_PP_GREATER(BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_SIZE(__VA_ARGS__), 1)) \
BOOST_PP_ARRAY_ENUM(BOOST_PP_ARRAY_POP_FRONT( \
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_TO_ARRAY(__VA_ARGS__)))) \
/**/
Also, why is there no BOOST_PP_ARRAY_ENUM_TRAILING? It would make this solution much less horrible.
Edit: Alright, here is a BOOST_PP_ARRAY_ENUM_TRAILING, and a version that uses it (this is now my favourite solution):
#define BOOST_PP_ARRAY_ENUM_TRAILING(array) \
BOOST_PP_COMMA_IF(BOOST_PP_ARRAY_SIZE(array)) BOOST_PP_ARRAY_ENUM(array) \
/**/
#define BAR(...) printf( \
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_ELEM(0, __VA_ARGS__) "\n" \
BOOST_PP_ARRAY_ENUM_TRAILING(BOOST_PP_ARRAY_POP_FRONT( \
BOOST_PP_VARIADIC_TO_ARRAY(__VA_ARGS__)))) \
/**/
A very simple macro I'm using for debug printing:
#define DBG__INT(fmt, ...) printf(fmt "%s", __VA_ARGS__);
#define DBG(...) DBG__INT(__VA_ARGS__, "\n")
int main() {
DBG("No warning here");
DBG("and we can add as many arguments as needed. %s", "nice!");
return 0;
}
No matter how many arguments are passed to DBG there are no c99 warning.
The trick is DBG__INT adding a dummy param so ... will always have at least one argument and c99 is satisfied.
I ran into a similar problem recently, and I do believe there's a solution.
The key idea is that there's a way to write a macro NUM_ARGS to count the number of arguments which a variadic macro is given. You can use a variation of NUM_ARGS to build NUM_ARGS_CEILING2, which can tell you whether a variadic macro is given 1 argument or 2-or-more arguments. Then you can write your Bar macro so that it uses NUM_ARGS_CEILING2 and CONCAT to send its arguments to one of two helper macros: one which expects exactly 1 argument, and another which expects a variable number of arguments greater than 1.
Here's an example where I use this trick to write the macro UNIMPLEMENTED, which is very similar to BAR:
STEP 1:
/**
* A variadic macro which counts the number of arguments which it is
* passed. Or, more precisely, it counts the number of commas which it is
* passed, plus one.
*
* Danger: It can't count higher than 20. If it's given 0 arguments, then it
* will evaluate to 1, rather than to 0.
*/
#define NUM_ARGS(...) \
NUM_ARGS_COUNTER(__VA_ARGS__, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, \
12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1)
#define NUM_ARGS_COUNTER(a1, a2, a3, a4, a5, a6, a7, \
a8, a9, a10, a11, a12, a13, \
a14, a15, a16, a17, a18, a19, a20, \
N, ...) \
N
STEP 1.5:
/*
* A variant of NUM_ARGS that evaluates to 1 if given 1 or 0 args, or
* evaluates to 2 if given more than 1 arg. Behavior is nasty and undefined if
* it's given more than 20 args.
*/
#define NUM_ARGS_CEIL2(...) \
NUM_ARGS_COUNTER(__VA_ARGS__, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, \
2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1)
Step 2:
#define _UNIMPLEMENTED1(msg) \
log("My creator has forsaken me. %s:%s:%d." msg, __FILE__, \
__func__, __LINE__)
#define _UNIMPLEMENTED2(msg, ...) \
log("My creator has forsaken me. %s:%s:%d." msg, __FILE__, \
__func__, __LINE__, __VA_ARGS__)
STEP 3:
#define UNIMPLEMENTED(...) \
CONCAT(_UNIMPLEMENTED, NUM_ARGS_CEIL2(__VA_ARGS__))(__VA_ARGS__)
Where CONCAT is implemented in the usual way. As a quick hint, if the above seems confusing: the goal of CONCAT there is to expand to another macro "call".
Note that NUM_ARGS itself isn't used. I just included it to illustrate the basic trick here. See Jens Gustedt's P99 blog for a nice treatment of it.
Two notes:
NUM_ARGS is limited in the number of arguments that it handles. Mine
can only handle up to 20, although the number is totally arbitrary.
NUM_ARGS, as shown, has a pitfall in that it returns 1 when given 0 arguments. The gist of it is that NUM_ARGS is technically counting [commas + 1], and not args. In this
particular case, it actually works to our
advantage. _UNIMPLEMENTED1 will handle an empty token just fine
and it saves us from having to write _UNIMPLEMENTED0. Gustedt has a
workaround for that as well, although I haven't used it and I'm not sure if it would work for what we're doing here.
If you are using gcc 8+, clang 6+ or MSVC 2019 (source), then you can also use the (newer) __VA_OPT__ macro, which conditionally expands if __VA_ARGS__ is non-empty.
So, we can convert the two FOO and BAR macros into one:
#define FOO(s, ...) printf(s __VA_OPT__(,) __VA_ARGS__)
and so, FOO("hello!") will expand to printf("hello!"), and FOO("x = %d", 5) will expand to printf("x = %d", 5).
This is a relatively new feature (introduced in C++2a) so your compiler might not support it yet.
This is the simplified version that I use. It is based upon the great techniques of the other answers here, so many props to them:
#define _SELECT(PREFIX,_5,_4,_3,_2,_1,SUFFIX,...) PREFIX ## _ ## SUFFIX
#define _BAR_1(fmt) printf(fmt "\n")
#define _BAR_N(fmt, ...) printf(fmt "\n", __VA_ARGS__);
#define BAR(...) _SELECT(_BAR,__VA_ARGS__,N,N,N,N,1)(__VA_ARGS__)
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
BAR("here is a log message");
BAR("here is a log message with a param: %d", 42);
return 0;
}
That's it.
As with other solutions this is limited to the number of arguments the macro. To support more, add more parameters to _SELECT, and more N arguments. The argument names count down (instead of up) to serve as a reminder that the count-based SUFFIX argument is provided in reverse order.
This solution treats 0 arguments as though it is 1 argument. So BAR() nominally "works", because it expands to _SELECT(_BAR,,N,N,N,N,1)(), which expands to _BAR_1()(), which expands to printf("\n").
If you want, you can get creative with the use of _SELECT and provide different macros for different number of arguments. For example, here we have a LOG macro that takes a 'level' argument before the format. If format is missing, it logs "(no message)", if there is just 1 argument, it will log it through "%s", otherwise it will treat the format argument as a printf format string for the remaining arguments.
#define _LOG_1(lvl) printf("[%s] (no message)\n", #lvl)
#define _LOG_2(lvl,fmt) printf("[%s] %s\n", #lvl, fmt)
#define _LOG_N(lvl,fmt, ...) printf("[%s] " fmt "\n", #lvl, __VA_ARGS__)
#define LOG(...) _SELECT(_LOG,__VA_ARGS__,N,N,N,2,1)(__VA_ARGS__)
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
LOG(INFO);
LOG(DEBUG, "here is a log message");
LOG(WARN, "here is a log message with param: %d", 42);
return 0;
}
/* outputs:
[INFO] (no message)
[DEBUG] here is a log message
[WARN] here is a log message with param: 42
*/
if c++11 or above is available, and the macro is intended to be expanded to a function call, you can make a wrapper for it, for example:
#define BAR(fmt, ...) printf(fmt, __VA_ARGS__)
can be converted to
#define BAR(fmt, ...) BAR_wrapper(fmt)(__VA_ARGS__)
where BAR_wrapper can be defined as:
struct BAR_wrapper_t {
BAR_wrapper_t(const char* fmt) : fmt(fmt) {}
const char* fmt;
int operator()() const { return printf(fmt); }
template <typename... Args>
int operator()(Args&& args) const { return printf(fmt, std::forward<Args>(args)...); }
};
inline BAR_wrapper_t BAR_wrapper(const char* fmt) { return BAR_wrapper_t(fmt); }
In your situation (at least 1 argument present, never 0), you can define BAR as BAR(...), use Jens Gustedt's HAS_COMMA(...) to detect a comma and then dispatch to BAR0(Fmt) or BAR1(Fmt,...) accordingly.
This:
#define HAS_COMMA(...) HAS_COMMA_16__(__VA_ARGS__, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 0, 0)
#define HAS_COMMA_16__(_0, _1, _2, _3, _4, _5, _6, _7, _8, _9, _10, _11, _12, _13, _14, _15, ...) _15
#define CAT_(X,Y) X##Y
#define CAT(X,Y) CAT_(X,Y)
#define BAR(.../*All*/) CAT(BAR,HAS_COMMA(__VA_ARGS__))(__VA_ARGS__)
#define BAR0(X) printf(X "\n")
#define BAR1(X,...) printf(X "\n",__VA_ARGS__)
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
BAR("here is a log message");
BAR("here is a log message with a param: %d", 42);
}
compiles with -pedantic without a warning.
C (gcc), 762 bytes
#define EMPTYFIRST(x,...) A x (B)
#define A(x) x()
#define B() ,
#define EMPTY(...) C(EMPTYFIRST(__VA_ARGS__) SINGLE(__VA_ARGS__))
#define C(...) D(__VA_ARGS__)
#define D(x,...) __VA_ARGS__
#define SINGLE(...) E(__VA_ARGS__, B)
#define E(x,y,...) C(y(),)
#define NONEMPTY(...) F(EMPTY(__VA_ARGS__) D, B)
#define F(...) G(__VA_ARGS__)
#define G(x,y,...) y()
#define STRINGIFY(...) STRINGIFY2(__VA_ARGS__)
#define STRINGIFY2(...) #__VA_ARGS__
#define BAR(fmt, ...) printf(fmt "\n" NONEMPTY(__VA_ARGS__) __VA_ARGS__)
int main() {
puts(STRINGIFY(NONEMPTY()));
puts(STRINGIFY(NONEMPTY(1)));
puts(STRINGIFY(NONEMPTY(,2)));
puts(STRINGIFY(NONEMPTY(1,2)));
BAR("here is a log message");
BAR("here is a log message with a param: %d", 42);
}
Try it online!
Assumes:
No arg contain comma or bracket
No arg contain A~G (can rename to hard_collide ones)
The standard solution is to use FOO instead of BAR. There are a few weird cases of argument reordering it probably can't do for you (though I bet someone can come up with clever hacks to disassemble and reassemble __VA_ARGS__ conditionally based on the number of arguments in it!) but in general using FOO "usually" just works.