Скачать или смотреть How to Effectively Combine C+ + Concepts Using Variadic Templates

Discover how to solve issues in combining C+ + concepts by leveraging variadic templates and fold expressions effectively. Learn step-by-step solutions!
---
This video is based on the question https://stackoverflow.com/q/63799653/ asked by the user 'Bob Pretzker' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/10428669/ ) and on the answer https://stackoverflow.com/a/63799885/ provided by the user 'HTNW' ( https://stackoverflow.com/u/5684257/ ) 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: how can a c+ + concept combine concepts?

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.
---
How to Effectively Combine C+ + Concepts Using Variadic Templates

In the world of modern C+ + , especially with the introduction of C+ + 20, the use of concepts has revolutionized how we define constraints and interfaces for templates. However, combining concepts using variadic templates can sometimes lead to confusion or errors, especially when the syntax is not quite right. In this guide, we will explore how to effectively combine concepts in C+ + and provide a solution to a common problem related to this subject.

The Problem: Understanding the Error in Combining Concepts

Let's take a look at a specific case that prompted a question about combining concepts. The user tried to define a concept that checks whether multiple types satisfy the IsAwaiter concept. The initial attempt looked like this:

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

And then they tried to combine it using:

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

However, while building this code with Clang, the following error erupted:

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

What Went Wrong?

The issue here lies in the misunderstanding of how to apply concepts versus type traits. The std::conjunction template is designed to work with type traits, which have a static member value that resolves to a boolean. When you try to use a concept (which is essentially just a boolean) as a type trait, it leads to confusion, hence the error.

The Solution: Leveraging Fold Expressions

In C+ + 20, rather than trying to shoehorn concepts into a type trait framework, we can utilize fold expressions to express our intent directly. Here’s how you can redefine the IsAwaitables concept correctly:

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

Break Down of the Solution

Concept Definition: The line (IsAwaiter<AWAITABLES> && ...); employs a fold expression on the logical AND operator (&&). This works by checking each AWAITABLES type against the IsAwaiter concept and combining the results.

Using static_assert for Testing: We can effectively test our new concept using static_assert in a simple user-defined struct like this:

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

Why This Works

With this change:

Flexibility: The new IsAwaitables concept can handle any number of types, making it much more versatile.

Simplicity: By using fold expressions, we maintain clarity in our intent, allowing others (or even future you) to read and understand the code with ease.

Conclusion

Combining concepts in C+ + can certainly introduce complexities, but by understanding how to properly use variadic templates and embracing new C+ + features such as fold expressions, we can create robust and clear code. We hope this post shed light on the intricacies of C+ + concepts and provided you with a necessary workaround for effective implementation.

Feel free to share your thoughts or questions in the comments section!