Скачать или смотреть Resolving the C+ + 20 Concept Issue: How to Require a Bool Member Function

Learn how to properly implement `C+ + 20` concepts to require a member function returning a bool type. This guide will equip you with solutions and insights needed to avoid common pitfalls.
---
This video is based on the question https://stackoverflow.com/q/62283582/ asked by the user 'Topological Sort' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/2216129/ ) and on the answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/62283636/ provided by the user 'cigien' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/8372853/ ) at 'Stack Overflow' website. Thanks to these great users and Stackexchange community for their contributions.

Visit these links for original content and any more details, such as alternate solutions, latest updates/developments on topic, comments, revision history etc. For example, the original title of the Question was: Can't make C+ + 20 concept requiring bool member function

Also, Content (except music) licensed under CC BY-SA https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/l...
The original Question post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license, and the original Answer post is licensed under the 'CC BY-SA 4.0' ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/... ) license.

If anything seems off to you, please feel free to write me at vlogize [AT] gmail [DOT] com.
---
Resolving the C+ + 20 Concept Issue: How to Require a Bool Member Function

C+ + 20 introduced concepts, a powerful way to constrain template types and ensure they meet certain requirements. However, developers often encounter issues when implementing these concepts, particularly when it comes to requiring member functions that return certain types. In this guide, we'll specifically address the problem: "Why does my C+ + 20 concept for a bool member function not work?" and provide you with a clear solution.

The Problem at Hand

When trying to define a concept that verifies if a type has a member function returning a bool, many developers face errors. For example, consider the following code snippet:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

The Error Messages

As seen from the code, both Visual Studio (when using the C+ + 20 flag) and g+ + 10 give an error stating that "bool is not a type constraint". This can be confusing and frustrating, especially when you expect that your implementation is correct. What should you use instead to specify the requirement of a bool returning member function?

The Solution: Using std::convertible_to

The issue occurs because the syntax { t.foo() } -> bool; is incorrect for defining a type constraint within a concept. Instead, we should define it using std::convertible_to.

Here's the corrected implementation:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

Key Points of the Solution:

Explicit Constraints: By using std::convertible_to<bool>, this specification means that the return type of t.foo() must be able to convert to bool. It provides greater flexibility since t.foo() can return types that are not exactly bool but can still be evaluated in a Boolean context.

Exact Match: If you want to be stricter and require that the return type is exactly a bool, you can use std::same_as as follows:

[[See Video to Reveal this Text or Code Snippet]]

This asserts that foo() must return only the bool type without any conversions.

Conclusion

In C+ + 20, while using concepts, it's crucial to define your requirements in a manner that is syntactically and semantically correct. By following the outlined solution, you can effectively check for a boolean member function in a type without running into complications. The use of std::convertible_to and std::same_as opens up a world of flexibility and precision in your template programming.

Ensure you implement these practices in your C+ + 20 projects to make the most of this powerful feature and minimize errors related to type constraints. Happy coding!