Solving the Puzzle of Trying to Put an Object into a std::optional -- Raymond Chen

By Blog Staff | Jan 10, 2025 11:06 AM | Tags: None

Last time, we investigated the puzzle of why the compiler wouldn’t let us put an object into a std::optional. It came down to the fact that the object is not copy-constructible, move-constructible, copy-assignable, or move-assignable, so there’s no way to put the temporary object into the std::optional.

Solving the Puzzle of Trying to Put an Object into a std::optional

by Raymond Chen

From the article:

What we have to do is construct the object in place inside the std::optional. And the C++ standard library term for “construct an object inside a container” is “emplace”.

struct Doodad
{
    Doodad();
    ~Doodad();
    std::unique_ptr<DoodadStuff> m_stuff;
};

struct Widget
{
    std::optional<Doodad> m_doodad;

    Widget()
    {
        if (doodads_enabled()) {
            m_doodad.emplace();
        }
    }
};

The parameters to emplace are whatever parameters you would have passed to the Doodad constructor. In our case, we wanted the default constructor, so that means that we pass nothing to emplace().

Court is in session: Top 10 most notorious C and C++ errors in 2024

By Andrey Karpov | Jan 8, 2025 07:28 AM | Tags: top 10 pvs-studio errors bugs

Every year, we witness the same drama: bugs wreak havoc on our code as if asserting their dominance. But today, the tide turns—it's time for judgment. Let's dive into the most intriguing bugs we've uncovered this year.

Court is in session: Top 10 most notorious C and C++ errors in 2024

by Aleksandra Uvarova

From the article:

The seventh defendant, what are you draggin' behind your back? Show us quickly! Ah! A little thief! Decided to pocket a juicy chunk of code, huh? No chance, we're bringing this to the light. Honestly, we really wanted to paste the full code of the function here—which has almost 400 code lines—to make searching for errors more interesting. However, we don't want to abuse your mouse wheel, so we've included just the most intriguing part.

Write More C++ Code Thanks to constexpr -- Andreas Fertig

By Blog Staff | Jan 6, 2025 11:15 AM | Tags: None

Since its introduction, constexpr in C++ has evolved significantly, offering powerful ways to optimize code at compile-time. This article shares a real-world story of using constexpr to dramatically reduce memory usage and code size in an embedded system, showcasing its potential to improve both performance and efficiency.

Write More C++ Code Thanks to constexpr

by Andreas Fertig

From the article:

I'm a big fan of constexpr and am not alone. Jason Turner is also very vocal, having coined the term "constexpr all the things".

Well, demonstrating the powers of constexpr is nonetheless something difficult. I know that from my training classes and various consulting contracts. Today, I'd like to share a story from back in time when a customer hired me to consult. They did develop an embedded system and ran out of memory. Not during run-time, but before. The features they wanted to put in the chip were too big in code size and somewhat RAM.

Initial constexpr-free example

They used a class I've seen a couple of times in embedded systems with some variations. A string brings its memory picky-back.

It’s just ‘,’ – The Comma Operator -- Coral Kashri

By Blog Staff | Jan 3, 2025 11:07 AM | Tags: None

We all know that every ‘,’ matters in this language, so I decided to talk directly about that character today. So, how much impact can be for such a small little character?

It’s just ‘,’ – The Comma Operator

by Coral Kashri

From the article:

This operator comes from C, where it tells the compiler to evaluate all the expressions (left to right) and to return the result of the latest evaluated expression. For example:

     int a, b;

     a = 5, b = 4, b += a, ++a, std::cout << b << " " << a; // Prints 9 6

Another example of that operator usage is as follows:

     for (size_t i = 0, k = 500; i < 10; ++i, ++k) { /*...*/ }

We can see this operator in action in the third section of the for statement. It evaluates the ++i and then evaluates ++k.

How to Ensure a Class is not Copyable or Movable -- Sandor Dargo

By Blog Staff | Dec 31, 2024 10:53 AM | Tags: None

The topic of this post is to show different ways to ensure that a class is either non-moveable or non-copyable.

How to Ensure a Class is not Copyable or Movable

by Sandor Dargo

From the article:

If we follow the classification proposed by Sebastian Theophil, we can talk about 4 different class types:

• value classes
• container classes
• resource classes
• singleton classes

While the first two should be regular classes offering both copy and move semantics, the latter two are different. One shouldn’t be able to copy resources and singletons probably shouldn’t be moveable.

It’s up to us to ensure that a class we create implements the right special member functions (SMFs from now on). And the Hinnant table is here to guide us.

In C++, How Can I Make a Default Parameter be the This Pointer of the Caller? -- Raymond Chen

By Blog Staff | Dec 27, 2024 10:47 AM | Tags: None

In C++, associating member objects like properties or events with their containing class often requires passing this redundantly. This article explores a generalized, flexible solution using templates, variadic arguments, and deducing this to streamline ownership initialization without boilerplate.

In C++, How Can I Make a Default Parameter be the This Pointer of the Caller? Revisited

by Raymond Chen

From the article:

Some time ago, we looked at making the default parameter of a method be the this pointer of the caller. The scenario was something like this:

struct Property
{
    Property(char const* name, int initial, Object* owner) :
        m_name(name), m_value(initial), m_owner(owner) {}

    ⟦ other methods elided - use your imagination ⟧

    char const* m_name;
    Object* m_owner;
    int m_value;
};

struct Widget : Object
{
    Property Height{ "Height", 10, this };
    Property Width{ "Width", 10, this };
};

and we didn’t want to have to type this as the last parameter to all the Property constructors. We came up with this:

template<typename D>
struct PropertyHelper
{
    Property Prop(char const* name, int initial)
    { return Property(name, initial, static_cast<D*>(this)); }
};

struct Widget : Object, PropertyHelper<Widget>
{
    Property Height = Prop("Height", 10);
    Property Width = Prop("Width", 10);
};

The Operations for Reading and Writing Single Elements for C++ Standard Library Maps -- Raymond Chen

By Blog Staff | Dec 23, 2024 01:33 PM | Tags: None

Some time ago, I noted that the std::map subscript operator is an attractive nuisance. It is the most convenient syntax, but is not often what you actually want.

The Operations for Reading and Writing Single Elements for C++ Standard Library Maps

by Raymond Chen

From the article:

I’ve broken down the various std::map lookup and update operations into a table so you can choose the best one for your situation.

In the table above, key is the map key, value is the mapped type, and params are parameters to the mapped type constructor.

Note that insert and the first emplace¹ take a value which is discarded if it turns out that the key already exists. This is undesirable if creating the value is expensive.

One frustrating scenario is the case where the mapped type’s default constructor is not the constructor you want to use for operator[], or if you want the initial mapped value to be the result of a function call rather than a constructor. Here’s something I sort of threw together.

C++ Online 2025 Registration now Open

By philsquared | Dec 21, 2024 01:27 PM | Tags: None

C++ Online conference and workshop tickets are now available:

C++ Online 2025 Registration Now Open!

by C++ Online

From the article:

We’re excited to announce that ticket sales for C++Online 2025 are officially open! Join us from 26th - 28th February for three days packed with expert talks, networking, and interactive virtual experiences—all from the comfort of your own home.

Trip Report: Fall ISO C++ Meeting in Wrocław, Poland -- Jonathan Müller

By Blog Staff | Dec 20, 2024 10:57 AM | Tags: None

Jonathan Müller attended the fall 2024 meeting of the ISO C++ standardization committee in Wrocław, Poland. This was the fifth meeting for the upcoming C++26 standard and the feature freeze for major C++26 features.

Trip Report: Fall ISO C++ Meeting in Wrocław, Poland

by Jonathan Müller

From the article:

For an overview of all the papers that made progress, read Herb Sutter's trip report. Contracts and profiles are the big ticket items that made the most progress this meeting. Contracts is forwarded to wording review, while still being fiercely opposed by some. Profiles is essentially standardized static analysis to improve memory safety, although some deem it ineffective. Due to various scheduling conflicts I did not attend any of the relevant discussions in these spaces. Instead, I am going to share my thoughts about ranges, relocation, and reflection.

Ranges

I've spent the first day and a half co-chairing SG 9, the study group for std::ranges. During discussions, we realized two big holes in the range library that we need to address as soon as possible. They both concern the concept of sized ranges.

The first hole is related to proposal P3179—C++ parallel range algorithms, which adds an execution policy to the algorithms in std::ranges. This makes it trivial to run multi-threaded algorithms: Instead of writing std::ranges::transform(vec, output, fn), you write std::ranges::transform(std::execution::par, vec, output, fn) and now your input is split into multiple chunks and processed in parallel.

PVS-Studio 7.34: support for Apple Silicon ARM64, CodeChecker

By Andrey Karpov | Dec 19, 2024 12:23 AM | Tags: sast pvs-studio codechecker arm64

PVS-Studio 7.34 has been released. Discover the latest features, including support for Apple Silicon processors with ARM64 architecture, .NET 9 project compatibility, the introduction of the taint analysis mechanism in the Java analyzer, and more.

PVS-Studio 7.34: support for Apple Silicon ARM64, CodeChecker

by Aleksandra Uvarova

From the article:

New diagnostic rules. C, C++:

• V1116. Creating an exception object without an explanatory message may result in insufficient logging.
• V1117. The declared function type is cv-qualified. The behavior when using this type is undefined.
• V2022. Implicit type conversion from integer type to enum type.
• V5014. OWASP. Cryptographic function is deprecated. Its use can lead to security issues. Consider switching to an equivalent newer function.