C (Preprocessor): How to concatenate/append substitution string - c

I define my exceptions on the command line:
-DEXCEPTION_1=\"first\" -DEXCEPTION_2=\"second\" -DEXCEPTION_3=\"third\"
which I check against a string:
except = 0;
#ifdef EXCEPTION_1
if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_1, mystring))
{ except = 1;
}
#endif
#ifdef EXCEPTION_2
if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_2, mystring))
{ except = 1;
}
#endif
#ifdef EXCEPTION_3
if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_3, mystring))
{ except = 1;
}
#endif
if (except == 1)
{ // do something
}
else
{ // do something else
}
Needless to say, while this works, it is also quite ugly, inflexible and causes redundancy in my code.
Is there a way to append a string to a preprocessor macro variable?
I would like to get something like this (the problem of course is that #append does not exist):
#ifdef EXCEPTION_1 #append EXCEPTIONS if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_1, mystring)) { except = 1; }
#ifdef EXCEPTION_2 #append EXCEPTIONS if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_2, mystring)) { except = 1; }
#ifdef EXCEPTION_3 #append EXCEPTIONS if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_3, mystring)) { except = 1; }
Then I could just use EXCEPTIONS in the code and it would work with all possible permutations of exceptions.
In other words I want to append a string to a macro variable - is it possible?

You can have chains of defines, but it won't look much better:
#ifdef EXCEPTION_1
#define EXCEPTIONS1 if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_1, mystring)) { except = 1; }
#else
#define EXCEPTIONS1
#endif
#ifdef EXCEPTION_2
#define EXCEPTIONS2 EXCEPTIONS1 if (! strcmp(EXCEPTION_2, mystring)) { except = 1; }
#else
#define EXCEPTIONS2 EXCEPTIONS1
#endif
// etc
Again, not much better.
And you really shouldn't define macros with open if's. It allows weird interactions like if(cond) EXCEPTIONS1 else cout<<"error"; -- that won't do what you expect because EXCEPTIONS1 is a plain if and will gobble up the else branch.
The typical way of writing macros with code blocks is to wrap the whole thing in a do{...}while(0) (note no ending ;).

Checkout the token stringification and concatenation section here
It might help some. In general, it would seem easier to use your command line macro to populate a table and have a macro that simply expands to a loop that checks the successive entries of that table to set the except flag.
For instance, save the following as silly.c and compile with cc -DEX1=\"hello\"
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
struct Except {
const char* key;
int flag;
};
struct Except table[] = {
#if defined(EX1)
{EX1,1},
#endif
{NULL,0}
};
#define CHECKEX(mys,rv) { rv = 0;for(int i=0;table[i].key!=0;i++) \
if (strcmp(table[i].key,(mys))==0) \
rv = 1; \
}
int main()
{
int rv;
CHECKEX("hello",rv);
if (rv)
printf("Got an hello\n");
else printf("Got nothing\n");
return 0;
}
Simply add more "blocks" to the table as needed. Just a suggestion of course.

You can convert a macro argument to a string:
#define STR(x) #x
STR(hello) --> "hello"
And you can concatenate string literals by just writing them next to each other:
"123" "abc" --> "123abc"
Or create a macro:
#define CONCAT(a, b) a b
CONCAT("hello", " world!") --> "hello world!"

You can use ## to concatenate string to macros. Use an index and use the conditions only to set the index. Then at the end you can concatenate the index with your macro EXCEPTION. like,
define a macro like #define append(name) name ## counter
this will in turn give you name as name1 if counter is 1
Now you can define different append macros to come with the result in a single variable name

Related

How to pass a string as a macro?

There are many functions in the C libraries that require users to input with macros.
I wonder, if I have an array of strings, with contents of macros, like so:
char s[][3] = {"SIGINT", "SIGKILL", "SIGSTOP"};
How can I pass these strings as macros? (Like so:)
signal(s[0], do_something);
with do_something is a function pointer.
(and yes, technically I can pass ints in this case, but... hypothetically, ya know?)
EDIT:
As #RemyLebeau and SGeorgiades point out, the "SIGINT",... are aliases for integer consts, and therefore can be stored in an int array, like so:
int s[3] = {SIGINT, SIGKILL, SIGSTOP};
Although SGeorgiades and Remy Lebeau already gave you the answer, here is something that I've used in the past to allow conversion and pretty printing of signal numbers and names:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <string.h>
struct sigfun {
int signo;
const char *signame;
};
#define SIGFUN(_sig) \
{ \
.signo = _sig, \
.signame = #_sig \
}
struct sigfun siglist[] = {
SIGFUN(SIGINT),
SIGFUN(SIGKILL),
SIGFUN(SIGSTOP),
// ...
{ .signo = 0, .signame = NULL }
};
#define SIGFORALL(_sig) \
_sig = siglist; _sig->signame != NULL; ++_sig
int
signame_to_signo(const char *signame)
{
struct sigfun *sig;
for (SIGFORALL(sig)) {
if (strcmp(sig->signame,signame) == 0)
break;
}
return sig->signo;
}
const char *
signo_to_signame(int signo)
{
struct sigfun *sig;
for (SIGFORALL(sig)) {
if (signo == sig->signo)
break;
}
return sig->signame;
}
UPDATE:
why not put for into SIGFORALL? –
tstanisl
For a few reasons ...
I've done that before (e.g.):
#define SIGFORALL(_sig) \
for (_sig = siglist; _sig->signame != 0; ++_sig)
SIGFORALL(sig) {
// do stuff
}
This tends to confuse certain IDEs and/or tools that parse the code without running it through the preprocessor.
It's also more difficult for programmers to quickly (without digesting the macro) skip over it.
They don't see a for and have trouble figuring out what SIGFORALL(sig) { does.
Is the macro a wrapper for if, for, or while?
With:
#define SIGFORALL(_sig) \
_sig = siglist; _sig->signame != 0; ++_sig
for (SIGFORALL(sig)) {
// do stuff
}
there is a better chance they can continue around the construct because they can understand (i.e. skip over) the for (...) [syntactically] without having to know what the macro is doing. That is, nobody has to "drill down" into the macro unless they wish to.
Another reason is that without the for in the macro, we can add extra code to the for loop's initialization and iteration expressions. It's more flexible.
For example, I've used a similar macro for linked list traversal and wanted to know the index/count of an element:
#define LLFORALL(_node) \
_node = nodelist; _node != NULL; _node = _node->next
int idx;
for (idx = 0, LLFORALL(node), ++idx) {
if (node->value == 5)
printf("found value at index %d\n",idx);
}
There's no absolute rule about this. Ultimately, it's a [personal] style preference.
Perhaps what you want instead is:
int s[3] = { SIGINT, SIGKILL, SIGSTOP };
signal(s[0], do_something);

Using X-lists and preprocessor directives to generate configurable C Code At compile time

I have a codebase already containing repetitive code, with only minor differences, serializable ID-s, indexes, variable arrays.
The codebase is huge, and some components are being activated/deactivated based on simple preprocessor directives and constants(e.g.: #define CFG_PROJECT cfgAutobot, #define CFG_PROJECT cfgUltron, ..etc).
The functionality is effectively the same, but with varying components and conditionals. Example:
int somedata;
int somecounter;
void main_loop(){
#if(CFG_PROJECT == cfgAutobot)
if(someInterface() == 1){
somedata = some_other_interface();
}
#endif
#if(CFG_PROJECT == cfgUltron)
if(third_if() > 0){
someCounter++;
}
else
{
someCounter = 0;
}
#endif
}
void query_data(int selector){
if(False){
/* Dummy block */
}
#if(CFG_PROJECT == cfgUltron)
else if(selector == 1){
return somedata;
}
#endif
#if(CFG_PROJECT == cfgAutobot)
else if(selector == 2){
return someCounter;
}
#endif
else{
return Err_code;
}
}
Because the data this code works with is much more complicated, than a simple counter and integer, involves multiple components of varying sizes, these code parts are much more complicated. However they can be traced back to a common structure.
I was able to apply the X-list technique as follows:
#define Ultron_implementation X(var_ultron, (someInterface() == 1), update_function_1, selector_id_1)
#define Autobot_implementation X(var_autobot, (third_if() > 0), update_function_2, selector_id_2)
/* (Please note, that this is a simplified example, in the actual
code there are much more components, but the `main_loop`
implementation can be traced back to a few update functions) */
void update_function_1(int var, int selector) {
if(selector == 1){
var++;
}else{
var = 0;
}
}
void update_function_2(int var, int selector) {
if(selector == 1){
var = some_other_interface();
}else{
/* Nothing to do */
}
}
#define X(var_name,condition,func_name,sel_id) int var_name;
Ultron_implementation
Autobot_implementation
#undef X
void main_loop(){
#define X(var_name,condition,func_name,sel_id) \
if(condition){ \
func_name(var_name, true);\
}else{ \
func_name(var_name, false);\
}
Ultron_implementation
Autobot_implementation
#undef X
}
void query_data(int selector){
if(False){
/* Dummy block */
}
#define X(var_name,condition,func_name,sel_id) \
else if(selector == sel_id){ \
return var_name;\
}
Ultron_implementation
Autobot_implementation
#undef X
else{
return Err_code;
}
}
The problem with this is that in spite of it now being a unified implementation, the introduction of new components still needs copy-paste, and filtering via previously defined constants(i.e.: CFG_PROJECT) is now excluded from the logic.
Is there a way to minimize the need of copy-pasting into various places in the code and to filter based on defined constants (i.e. CFG_PROJECT)?
Filtering to predefined contstants at compile time would require the prerocessor directives #if, #ifdef, etc.. but there is no way to use these inside #define statements AFAIK.
However writing these outside the #define statements is totally legitimate.
#if(CFG_PROJECT == cfgAutobot)
#define Autobot_implementation X(var_autobot, (third_if() > 0), update_function_2, selector_id_1)
#else
#define Autobot_implementation
#endif
#if(CFG_PROJECT == cfgUltron)
#define Ultron_implementation X(var_autobot, (third_if() > 0), update_function_2, selector_id_2)
#else
#define Ultron_implementation
#endif
And the former can be compiled into a list(of sorts)
#define MACRO_LIST \
Autobot_implementation \
Ultron_implementation
Depending on the defined constants the elements of MACRO_LIST will either contain the X() function definition (i.e.: implementation), or an empty constant.
In the implementation now the following can be used:
void main_loop(){
#define X(var_name,condition,func_name,sel_id) \
if(condition){ \
func_name(var_name, true);\
}else{ \
func_name(var_name, false);\
}
MACRO_LIST
#undef X
}
To sum up the activated components, see how many components are activated and to refer to them in the implementation, the concatenate (##) token can be used in relation with e.g. an enumeration definition. Example:
#define X(var_name,condition,func_name,sel_id) var_name ## index,
tyepdef enum{
MACRO_LIST
components_end
}component_index;
#undef X
some_struct COMPONENT_FLAGS[components_end];
Basically any related variable, ID or implementation can be "serialized" this way.
Please note:
This solution makes the code harder to comprehend, maintain and really difficult to debug, but once it have been tested and verified it eliminates error possibilites coming from copypasting. The result will be a much cleaner, much more elegant and much smaller codebase, than the alternative.
It actually decreased development time from 3 months to a few hours in production code.

Store Preprocessor Constants Value then 'overwrite' through undef/define

I am trying to store a Preprocessor Constant's value then 'overwrite' it.
My Problem: The code below attempts to store a preprocessor constant's value in variable 'A' then the code undefines that variable then redefines it so it has a new value. The problem is that variable 'A' has the newly defined value and not the old one, if that makes sense. Can I store a Preprocessor Constants value and not its reference(Which is what seems like is happening)?
#ifdef CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED
#define SUB_CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED
#undef CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED
#endif
#define CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED "def"
int main()
{
printf(CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED); // prints out "def".
printf("\n");
printf(SUB_CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED); // prints out "def". I was hoping this would be "abc"
printf("\n");
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
// Usage: where the function def is a callback function for a window in a civil engineering program that runs ontop of windows
int def(int id, int cmd, int type)
{
#ifdef SUB_CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED
SUB_CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED(id, cmd, type);
#endif
// perform my custom code here
}
Short answer - no, it's not possible. Macros don't work like that.
But I doubt you really need to do this. A workaround, for example, would be to store the value in a variable before you overwrite it:
#ifdef CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED
std::string SUB_CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED = CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED;
#undef CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED
#else
std::string SUB_CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED = "";
#endif
#define CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED "def"
int main()
{
printf(CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED); // prints out "def".
printf("\n");
printf(SUB_CUSTOM_EVENT_CALLBACK_DEFINED); // prints out "def". I was hoping this would be "abc"
printf("\n");
system("PAUSE");
return 0;
}
Or not use macros at all for this purpose.

do { ... } while (0) — what is it good for? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Why use apparently meaningless do-while and if-else statements in macros?
(9 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
I've been seeing that expression for over 10 years now. I've been trying to think what it's good for. Since I see it mostly in #defines, I assume it's good for inner scope variable declaration and for using breaks (instead of gotos.)
Is it good for anything else? Do you use it?
It's the only construct in C that you can use to #define a multistatement operation, put a semicolon after, and still use within an if statement. An example might help:
#define FOO(x) foo(x); bar(x)
if (condition)
FOO(x);
else // syntax error here
...;
Even using braces doesn't help:
#define FOO(x) { foo(x); bar(x); }
Using this in an if statement would require that you omit the semicolon, which is counterintuitive:
if (condition)
FOO(x)
else
...
If you define FOO like this:
#define FOO(x) do { foo(x); bar(x); } while (0)
then the following is syntactically correct:
if (condition)
FOO(x);
else
....
It is a way to simplify error checking and avoid deep nested if's. For example:
do {
// do something
if (error) {
break;
}
// do something else
if (error) {
break;
}
// etc..
} while (0);
It helps to group multiple statements into a single one so that a function-like macro can actually be used as a function. Suppose you have:
#define FOO(n) foo(n);bar(n)
and you do:
void foobar(int n) {
if (n)
FOO(n);
}
then this expands to:
void foobar(int n) {
if (n)
foo(n);bar(n);
}
Notice that the second call bar(n) is not part of the if statement anymore.
Wrap both into do { } while(0), and you can also use the macro in an if statement.
It is interesting to note the following situation where the do {} while (0) loop won't work for you:
If you want a function-like macro that returns a value, then you will need a statement expression: ({stmt; stmt;}) instead of do {} while(0):
#include <stdio.h>
#define log_to_string1(str, fmt, arg...) \
do { \
sprintf(str, "%s: " fmt, "myprog", ##arg); \
} while (0)
#define log_to_string2(str, fmt, arg...) \
({ \
sprintf(str, "%s: " fmt, "myprog", ##arg); \
})
int main() {
char buf[1000];
int n = 0;
log_to_string1(buf, "%s\n", "No assignment, OK");
n += log_to_string1(buf + n, "%s\n", "NOT OK: gcc: error: expected expression before 'do'");
n += log_to_string2(buf + n, "%s\n", "This fixes it");
n += log_to_string2(buf + n, "%s\n", "Assignment worked!");
printf("%s", buf);
return 0;
}
Generically, do/while is good for any sort of loop construct where one must execute the loop at least once. It is possible to emulate this sort of looping through either a straight while or even a for loop, but often the result is a little less elegant. I'll admit that specific applications of this pattern are fairly rare, but they do exist. One which springs to mind is a menu-based console application:
do {
char c = read_input();
process_input(c);
} while (c != 'Q');

Easy way to use variables of enum types as string in C?

Here's what I am trying to do:
typedef enum { ONE, TWO, THREE } Numbers;
I am trying to write a function that would do a switch case similar to the following:
char num_str[10];
int process_numbers_str(Numbers num) {
switch(num) {
case ONE:
case TWO:
case THREE:
{
strcpy(num_str, num); //some way to get the symbolic constant name in here?
} break;
default:
return 0; //no match
return 1;
}
Instead of defining at every case, is there a way to set it using the enum variable like I am trying to do above?
The technique from Making something both a C identifier and a string? can be used here.
As usual with such preprocessor stuff, writing and understanding the preprocessor part can be hard, and includes passing macros to other macros and involves using # and ## operators, but using it is real easy. I find this style very useful for long enums, where maintaining the same list twice can be really troublesome.
Factory code - typed only once, usually hidden in the header:
enumFactory.h:
// expansion macro for enum value definition
#define ENUM_VALUE(name,assign) name assign,
// expansion macro for enum to string conversion
#define ENUM_CASE(name,assign) case name: return #name;
// expansion macro for string to enum conversion
#define ENUM_STRCMP(name,assign) if (!strcmp(str,#name)) return name;
/// declare the access function and define enum values
#define DECLARE_ENUM(EnumType,ENUM_DEF) \
enum EnumType { \
ENUM_DEF(ENUM_VALUE) \
}; \
const char *GetString(EnumType dummy); \
EnumType Get##EnumType##Value(const char *string); \
/// define the access function names
#define DEFINE_ENUM(EnumType,ENUM_DEF) \
const char *GetString(EnumType value) \
{ \
switch(value) \
{ \
ENUM_DEF(ENUM_CASE) \
default: return ""; /* handle input error */ \
} \
} \
EnumType Get##EnumType##Value(const char *str) \
{ \
ENUM_DEF(ENUM_STRCMP) \
return (EnumType)0; /* handle input error */ \
} \
Factory used
someEnum.h:
#include "enumFactory.h"
#define SOME_ENUM(XX) \
XX(FirstValue,) \
XX(SecondValue,) \
XX(SomeOtherValue,=50) \
XX(OneMoreValue,=100) \
DECLARE_ENUM(SomeEnum,SOME_ENUM)
someEnum.cpp:
#include "someEnum.h"
DEFINE_ENUM(SomeEnum,SOME_ENUM)
The technique can be easily extended so that XX macros accepts more arguments, and you can also have prepared more macros to substitute for XX for different needs, similar to the three I have provided in this sample.
Comparison to X-Macros using #include / #define / #undef
While this is similar to X-Macros others have mentioned, I think this solution is more elegant in that it does not require #undefing anything, which allows you to hide more of the complicated stuff is in the factory the header file - the header file is something you are not touching at all when you need to define a new enum, therefore new enum definition is a lot shorter and cleaner.
// Define your enumeration like this (in say numbers.h);
ENUM_BEGIN( Numbers )
ENUM(ONE),
ENUM(TWO),
ENUM(FOUR)
ENUM_END( Numbers )
// The macros are defined in a more fundamental .h file (say defs.h);
#define ENUM_BEGIN(typ) enum typ {
#define ENUM(nam) nam
#define ENUM_END(typ) };
// Now in one and only one .c file, redefine the ENUM macros and reinclude
// the numbers.h file to build a string table
#undef ENUM_BEGIN
#undef ENUM
#undef ENUM_END
#define ENUM_BEGIN(typ) const char * typ ## _name_table [] = {
#define ENUM(nam) #nam
#define ENUM_END(typ) };
#undef NUMBERS_H_INCLUDED // whatever you need to do to enable reinclusion
#include "numbers.h"
// Now you can do exactly what you want to do, with no retyping, and for any
// number of enumerated types defined with the ENUM macro family
// Your code follows;
char num_str[10];
int process_numbers_str(Numbers num) {
switch(num) {
case ONE:
case TWO:
case THREE:
{
strcpy(num_str, Numbers_name_table[num]); // eg TWO -> "TWO"
} break;
default:
return 0; //no match
return 1;
}
// Sweet no ? After being frustrated by this for years, I finally came up
// with this solution for my most recent project and plan to reuse the idea
// forever
There's no built-in solution. The easiest way is with an array of char* where the enum's int value indexes to a string containing the descriptive name of that enum. If you have a sparse enum (one that doesn't start at 0 or has gaps in the numbering) where some of the int mappings are high enough to make an array-based mapping impractical then you could use a hash table instead.
There is definitely a way to do this -- use X() macros. These macros use the C preprocessor to construct enums, arrays and code blocks from a list of source data. You only need to add new items to the #define containing the X() macro. The switch statement would expand automatically.
Your example can be written as follows:
// Source data -- Enum, String
#define X_NUMBERS \
X(ONE, "one") \
X(TWO, "two") \
X(THREE, "three")
...
// Use preprocessor to create the Enum
typedef enum {
#define X(Enum, String) Enum,
X_NUMBERS
#undef X
} Numbers;
...
// Use Preprocessor to expand data into switch statement cases
switch(num)
{
#define X(Enum, String) \
case Enum: strcpy(num_str, String); break;
X_NUMBERS
#undef X
default: return 0; break;
}
return 1;
There are more efficient ways (i.e. using X Macros to create an string array and enum index), but this is the simplest demo.
I know you have a couple good solid answers, but do you know about the # operator in the C preprocessor?
It lets you do this:
#define MACROSTR(k) #k
typedef enum {
kZero,
kOne,
kTwo,
kThree
} kConst;
static char *kConstStr[] = {
MACROSTR(kZero),
MACROSTR(kOne),
MACROSTR(kTwo),
MACROSTR(kThree)
};
static void kConstPrinter(kConst k)
{
printf("%s", kConstStr[k]);
}
C or C++ does not provide this functionality, although I've needed it often.
The following code works, although it's best suited for non-sparse enums.
typedef enum { ONE, TWO, THREE } Numbers;
char *strNumbers[] = {"one","two","three"};
printf ("Value for TWO is %s\n",strNumbers[TWO]);
By non-sparse, I mean not of the form
typedef enum { ONE, FOUR_THOUSAND = 4000 } Numbers;
since that has huge gaps in it.
The advantage of this method is that it put the definitions of the enums and strings near each other; having a switch statement in a function spearates them. This means you're less likely to change one without the other.
KISS. You will be doing all sorts of other switch/case things with your enums so why should printing be different? Forgetting a case in your print routine isn't a huge deal when you consider there are about 100 other places you can forget a case. Just compile -Wall, which will warn of non-exhaustive case matches. Don't use "default" because that will make the switch exhaustive and you wont get warnings. Instead, let the switch exit and deal with the default case like so...
const char *myenum_str(myenum e)
{
switch(e) {
case ONE: return "one";
case TWO: return "two";
}
return "invalid";
}
Try Converting C++ enums to strings. The comments have improvements that solve the problem when enum items have arbitrary values.
The use of boost::preprocessor makes possible an elegant solution like the following:
Step 1: include the header file:
#include "EnumUtilities.h"
Step 2: declare the enumeration object with the following syntax:
MakeEnum( TestData,
(x)
(y)
(z)
);
Step 3: use your data:
Getting the number of elements:
td::cout << "Number of Elements: " << TestDataCount << std::endl;
Getting the associated string:
std::cout << "Value of " << TestData2String(x) << " is " << x << std::endl;
std::cout << "Value of " << TestData2String(y) << " is " << y << std::endl;
std::cout << "Value of " << TestData2String(z) << " is " << z << std::endl;
Getting the enum value from the associated string:
std::cout << "Value of x is " << TestData2Enum("x") << std::endl;
std::cout << "Value of y is " << TestData2Enum("y") << std::endl;
std::cout << "Value of z is " << TestData2Enum("z") << std::endl;
This looks clean and compact, with no extra files to include.
The code I wrote within EnumUtilities.h is the following:
#include <boost/preprocessor/seq/for_each.hpp>
#include <string>
#define REALLY_MAKE_STRING(x) #x
#define MAKE_STRING(x) REALLY_MAKE_STRING(x)
#define MACRO1(r, data, elem) elem,
#define MACRO1_STRING(r, data, elem) case elem: return REALLY_MAKE_STRING(elem);
#define MACRO1_ENUM(r, data, elem) if (REALLY_MAKE_STRING(elem) == eStrEl) return elem;
#define MakeEnum(eName, SEQ) \
enum eName { BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH(MACRO1, , SEQ) \
last_##eName##_enum}; \
const int eName##Count = BOOST_PP_SEQ_SIZE(SEQ); \
static std::string eName##2String(const enum eName eel) \
{ \
switch (eel) \
{ \
BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH(MACRO1_STRING, , SEQ) \
default: return "Unknown enumerator value."; \
}; \
}; \
static enum eName eName##2Enum(const std::string eStrEl) \
{ \
BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH(MACRO1_ENUM, , SEQ) \
return (enum eName)0; \
};
There are some limitation, i.e. the ones of boost::preprocessor. In this case, the list of constants cannot be larger than 64 elements.
Following the same logic, you could also think to create sparse enum:
#define EnumName(Tuple) BOOST_PP_TUPLE_ELEM(2, 0, Tuple)
#define EnumValue(Tuple) BOOST_PP_TUPLE_ELEM(2, 1, Tuple)
#define MACRO2(r, data, elem) EnumName(elem) EnumValue(elem),
#define MACRO2_STRING(r, data, elem) case EnumName(elem): return BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE(EnumName(elem));
#define MakeEnumEx(eName, SEQ) \
enum eName { \
BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH(MACRO2, _, SEQ) \
last_##eName##_enum }; \
const int eName##Count = BOOST_PP_SEQ_SIZE(SEQ); \
static std::string eName##2String(const enum eName eel) \
{ \
switch (eel) \
{ \
BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH(MACRO2_STRING, _, SEQ) \
default: return "Unknown enumerator value."; \
}; \
};
In this case, the syntax is:
MakeEnumEx(TestEnum,
((x,))
((y,=1000))
((z,))
);
Usage is similar as above (minus the eName##2Enum function, that you could try to extrapolate from the previous syntax).
I tested it on mac and linux, but be aware that boost::preprocessor may not be fully portable.
By merging some of the techniques over here I came up with the simplest form:
#define MACROSTR(k) #k
#define X_NUMBERS \
X(kZero ) \
X(kOne ) \
X(kTwo ) \
X(kThree ) \
X(kFour ) \
X(kMax )
enum {
#define X(Enum) Enum,
X_NUMBERS
#undef X
} kConst;
static char *kConstStr[] = {
#define X(String) MACROSTR(String),
X_NUMBERS
#undef X
};
int main(void)
{
int k;
printf("Hello World!\n\n");
for (k = 0; k < kMax; k++)
{
printf("%s\n", kConstStr[k]);
}
return 0;
}
If you are using gcc, it's possible to use:
const char * enum_to_string_map[]={ [enum1]='string1', [enum2]='string2'};
Then just call for instance
enum_to_string_map[enum1]
Check out the ideas at Mu Dynamics Research Labs - Blog Archive. I found this earlier this year - I forget the exact context where I came across it - and have adapted it into this code. We can debate the merits of adding an E at the front; it is applicable to the specific problem addressed, but not part of a general solution. I stashed this away in my 'vignettes' folder - where I keep interesting scraps of code in case I want them later. I'm embarrassed to say that I didn't keep a note of where this idea came from at the time.
Header: paste1.h
/*
#(#)File: $RCSfile: paste1.h,v $
#(#)Version: $Revision: 1.1 $
#(#)Last changed: $Date: 2008/05/17 21:38:05 $
#(#)Purpose: Automated Token Pasting
*/
#ifndef JLSS_ID_PASTE_H
#define JLSS_ID_PASTE_H
/*
* Common case when someone just includes this file. In this case,
* they just get the various E* tokens as good old enums.
*/
#if !defined(ETYPE)
#define ETYPE(val, desc) E##val,
#define ETYPE_ENUM
enum {
#endif /* ETYPE */
ETYPE(PERM, "Operation not permitted")
ETYPE(NOENT, "No such file or directory")
ETYPE(SRCH, "No such process")
ETYPE(INTR, "Interrupted system call")
ETYPE(IO, "I/O error")
ETYPE(NXIO, "No such device or address")
ETYPE(2BIG, "Arg list too long")
/*
* Close up the enum block in the common case of someone including
* this file.
*/
#if defined(ETYPE_ENUM)
#undef ETYPE_ENUM
#undef ETYPE
ETYPE_MAX
};
#endif /* ETYPE_ENUM */
#endif /* JLSS_ID_PASTE_H */
Example source:
/*
#(#)File: $RCSfile: paste1.c,v $
#(#)Version: $Revision: 1.2 $
#(#)Last changed: $Date: 2008/06/24 01:03:38 $
#(#)Purpose: Automated Token Pasting
*/
#include "paste1.h"
static const char *sys_errlist_internal[] = {
#undef JLSS_ID_PASTE_H
#define ETYPE(val, desc) desc,
#include "paste1.h"
0
#undef ETYPE
};
static const char *xerror(int err)
{
if (err >= ETYPE_MAX || err <= 0)
return "Unknown error";
return sys_errlist_internal[err];
}
static const char*errlist_mnemonics[] = {
#undef JLSS_ID_PASTE_H
#define ETYPE(val, desc) [E ## val] = "E" #val,
#include "paste1.h"
#undef ETYPE
};
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < ETYPE_MAX; i++)
{
printf("%d: %-6s: %s\n", i, errlist_mnemonics[i], xerror(i));
}
return(0);
}
Not necessarily the world's cleanest use of the C pre-processor - but it does prevent writing the material out multiple times.
Making something both a C identifier and a string
#define stringify( name ) # name
enum MyEnum {
ENUMVAL1
};
...stuff...
stringify(EnumName::ENUMVAL1); // Returns MyEnum::ENUMVAL1
Further discussion on this method
Preprocessor directive tricks for newcomers
If the enum index is 0-based, you can put the names in an array of char*, and index them with the enum value.
I have created a simple templated class streamable_enum that uses stream operators << and >> and is based on the std::map<Enum, std::string>:
#ifndef STREAMABLE_ENUM_HPP
#define STREAMABLE_ENUM_HPP
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <map>
template <typename E>
class streamable_enum
{
public:
typedef typename std::map<E, std::string> tostr_map_t;
typedef typename std::map<std::string, E> fromstr_map_t;
streamable_enum()
{}
streamable_enum(E val) :
Val_(val)
{}
operator E() {
return Val_;
}
bool operator==(const streamable_enum<E>& e) {
return this->Val_ == e.Val_;
}
bool operator==(const E& e) {
return this->Val_ == e;
}
static const tostr_map_t& to_string_map() {
static tostr_map_t to_str_(get_enum_strings<E>());
return to_str_;
}
static const fromstr_map_t& from_string_map() {
static fromstr_map_t from_str_(reverse_map(to_string_map()));
return from_str_;
}
private:
E Val_;
static fromstr_map_t reverse_map(const tostr_map_t& eToS) {
fromstr_map_t sToE;
for (auto pr : eToS) {
sToE.emplace(pr.second, pr.first);
}
return sToE;
}
};
template <typename E>
streamable_enum<E> stream_enum(E e) {
return streamable_enum<E>(e);
}
template <typename E>
typename streamable_enum<E>::tostr_map_t get_enum_strings() {
// \todo throw an appropriate exception or display compile error/warning
return {};
}
template <typename E>
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, streamable_enum<E> e) {
auto& mp = streamable_enum<E>::to_string_map();
auto res = mp.find(e);
if (res != mp.end()) {
os << res->second;
} else {
os.setstate(std::ios_base::failbit);
}
return os;
}
template <typename E>
std::istream& operator>>(std::istream& is, streamable_enum<E>& e) {
std::string str;
is >> str;
if (str.empty()) {
is.setstate(std::ios_base::failbit);
}
auto& mp = streamable_enum<E>::from_string_map();
auto res = mp.find(str);
if (res != mp.end()) {
e = res->second;
} else {
is.setstate(std::ios_base::failbit);
}
return is;
}
#endif
Usage:
#include "streamable_enum.hpp"
using std::cout;
using std::cin;
using std::endl;
enum Animal {
CAT,
DOG,
TIGER,
RABBIT
};
template <>
streamable_enum<Animal>::tostr_map_t get_enum_strings<Animal>() {
return {
{ CAT, "Cat"},
{ DOG, "Dog" },
{ TIGER, "Tiger" },
{ RABBIT, "Rabbit" }
};
}
int main(int argc, char* argv []) {
cout << "What animal do you want to buy? Our offering:" << endl;
for (auto pr : streamable_enum<Animal>::to_string_map()) { // Use from_string_map() and pr.first instead
cout << " " << pr.second << endl; // to have them sorted in alphabetical order
}
streamable_enum<Animal> anim;
cin >> anim;
if (!cin) {
cout << "We don't have such animal here." << endl;
} else if (anim == Animal::TIGER) {
cout << stream_enum(Animal::TIGER) << " was a joke..." << endl;
} else {
cout << "Here you are!" << endl;
}
return 0;
}
Here is a solution using macros with the following features:
only write each value of the enum once, so there are no double lists to maintain
don't keep the enum values in a separate file that is later #included, so I can write it wherever I want
don't replace the enum itself, I still want to have the enum type defined, but in addition to it I want to be able to map every enum name to the corresponding string (to not affect legacy code)
the searching should be fast, so preferably no switch-case, for those huge enums
https://stackoverflow.com/a/20134475/1812866
I thought that a solution like Boost.Fusion one for adapting structs and classes would be nice, they even had it at some point, to use enums as a fusion sequence.
So I made just some small macros to generate the code to print the enums. This is not perfect and has nothing to see with Boost.Fusion generated boilerplate code, but can be used like the Boost Fusion macros. I want to really do generate the types needed by Boost.Fusion to integrate in this infrastructure which allows to print names of struct members, but this will happen later, for now this is just macros :
#ifndef SWISSARMYKNIFE_ENUMS_ADAPT_ENUM_HPP
#define SWISSARMYKNIFE_ENUMS_ADAPT_ENUM_HPP
#include <swissarmyknife/detail/config.hpp>
#include <string>
#include <ostream>
#include <boost/preprocessor/cat.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/stringize.hpp>
#include <boost/preprocessor/seq/for_each.hpp>
#define SWISSARMYKNIFE_ADAPT_ENUM_EACH_ENUMERATION_ENTRY_C( \
R, unused, ENUMERATION_ENTRY) \
case ENUMERATION_ENTRY: \
return BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE(ENUMERATION_ENTRY); \
break;
/**
* \brief Adapts ENUM to reflectable types.
*
* \param ENUM_TYPE To be adapted
* \param ENUMERATION_SEQ Sequence of enum states
*/
#define SWISSARMYKNIFE_ADAPT_ENUM(ENUM_TYPE, ENUMERATION_SEQ) \
inline std::string to_string(const ENUM_TYPE& enum_value) { \
switch (enum_value) { \
BOOST_PP_SEQ_FOR_EACH( \
SWISSARMYKNIFE_ADAPT_ENUM_EACH_ENUMERATION_ENTRY_C, \
unused, ENUMERATION_SEQ) \
default: \
return BOOST_PP_STRINGIZE(ENUM_TYPE); \
} \
} \
\
inline std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const ENUM_TYPE& value) { \
os << to_string(value); \
return os; \
}
#endif
The old answer below is pretty bad, please don't use that. :)
Old answer:
I've been searching a way which solves this problem without changing too much the enums declaration syntax. I came to a solution which uses the preprocessor to retrieve a string from a stringified enum declaration.
I'm able to define non-sparse enums like this :
SMART_ENUM(State,
enum State {
RUNNING,
SLEEPING,
FAULT,
UNKNOWN
})
And I can interact with them in different ways:
// With a stringstream
std::stringstream ss;
ss << State::FAULT;
std::string myEnumStr = ss.str();
//Directly to stdout
std::cout << State::FAULT << std::endl;
//to a string
std::string myStr = State::to_string(State::FAULT);
//from a string
State::State myEnumVal = State::from_string(State::FAULT);
Based on the following definitions :
#define SMART_ENUM(enumTypeArg, ...) \
namespace enumTypeArg { \
__VA_ARGS__; \
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, const enumTypeArg& val) { \
os << swissarmyknife::enums::to_string(#__VA_ARGS__, val); \
return os; \
} \
\
std::string to_string(const enumTypeArg& val) { \
return swissarmyknife::enums::to_string(#__VA_ARGS__, val); \
} \
\
enumTypeArg from_string(const std::string &str) { \
return swissarmyknife::enums::from_string<enumTypeArg>(#__VA_ARGS__, str); \
} \
} \
namespace swissarmyknife { namespace enums {
static inline std::string to_string(const std::string completeEnumDeclaration, size_t enumVal) throw (std::runtime_error) {
size_t begin = completeEnumDeclaration.find_first_of('{');
size_t end = completeEnumDeclaration.find_last_of('}');
const std::string identifiers = completeEnumDeclaration.substr(begin + 1, end );
size_t count = 0;
size_t found = 0;
do {
found = identifiers.find_first_of(",}", found+1);
if (enumVal == count) {
std::string identifiersSubset = identifiers.substr(0, found);
size_t beginId = identifiersSubset.find_last_of("{,");
identifiersSubset = identifiersSubset.substr(beginId+1);
boost::algorithm::trim(identifiersSubset);
return identifiersSubset;
}
++count;
} while (found != std::string::npos);
throw std::runtime_error("The enum declaration provided doesn't contains this state.");
}
template <typename EnumType>
static inline EnumType from_string(const std::string completeEnumDeclaration, const std::string &enumStr) throw (std::runtime_error) {
size_t begin = completeEnumDeclaration.find_first_of('{');
size_t end = completeEnumDeclaration.find_last_of('}');
const std::string identifiers = completeEnumDeclaration.substr(begin + 1, end );
size_t count = 0;
size_t found = 0;
do {
found = identifiers.find_first_of(",}", found+1);
std::string identifiersSubset = identifiers.substr(0, found);
size_t beginId = identifiersSubset.find_last_of("{,");
identifiersSubset = identifiersSubset.substr(beginId+1);
boost::algorithm::trim(identifiersSubset);
if (identifiersSubset == enumStr) {
return static_cast<EnumType>(count);
}
++count;
} while (found != std::string::npos);
throw std::runtime_error("No valid enum value for the provided string");
}
}}
When I'll need support for sparse enum and when I'll have more time I'll improve the to_string and from_string implementations with boost::xpressive, but this will costs in compilation time because of the important templating performed and the executable generated is likely to be really bigger. But this has the advantage that it will be more readable and maintanable than this ugly manual string manipulation code. :D
Otherwise I always used boost::bimap to perform such mappings between enums value and string, but it has to be maintained manually.
Because I prefer not to use macros for all the usual reasons, I used a more limited macro solution that has the advantage of keeping the enum declaration macro free. Disadvantages include having to copy paste the macro defintion for each enum, and having to explicitly add a macro invocation when adding values to the enum.
std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream& os, provenance_wrapper::CaptureState cs)
{
#define HANDLE(x) case x: os << #x; break;
switch (cs) {
HANDLE(CaptureState::UNUSED)
HANDLE(CaptureState::ACTIVE)
HANDLE(CaptureState::CLOSED)
}
return os;
#undef HANDLE
}
There's a way simpler and imo sorta clearer approach
that was missing on this thread:
#define ENUM_PUSH(ENUM) ENUM,
#define STRING_PUSH(STR) #STR,
#define FETCH_MSG(X) \
X(string1) \
X(string2) \
static const char * msgStr[] = {
FETCH_MSG(STRING_PUSH)
};
enum msg {
FETCH_MSG(ENUM_PUSH)
};
static enum msg message;
void iterate(void) {
switch (message) {
case string1:
// do your thing here
break;
case string2:
break;
}
}
The only downside is that the last cell will be postceded by a comma,
though it appears to be acceptable by C/C++ compilers.

Resources