Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Extra libraries, Code snippets, applications etc. » C++ language problems and code snippets » Make THISFN simpler and more powerful (by taking advantage of some new c++ feature)
icon10.gif  Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #59037] Tue, 18 October 2022 21:08 Go to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
in Core/Function.h, we have THISFN defined like this
template <class Ptr, class Class, class Res, class... ArgTypes>
Function<Res (ArgTypes...)> MemFn(Ptr object, Res (Class::*method)(ArgTypes...))
{
	return [=](ArgTypes... args) { return (object->*method)(args...); };
}

#define THISFN(x)   MemFn(this, &CLASSNAME::x)


This can be done in C++20 with the following
#define THISFN(memfun) std::bind_front(&std::remove_cvref_t<decltype(*this)>::memfun, this)


Of course this involves only library feature (no core language features), so it should be able to be rewritten to make available in current versons of c++ compilers/libraries that UPP aims to conform to atm.

An additional benefit of above macro definition is that it relieves the library user of the burden of an otherwise useless typedef
class MyClass
{
    typedef MyClass CLASSNAME;
//....
}

to be able to use thisfn

BTW, thisfn is provided in the UPP library for a good reason: there are occasions where using thisfn is so much easier than using an lambda.

eg.
	menu.Set( THISFN(MenuMain) );

vs
	menu.Set ( [=, this] ( Bar & bar )
		{
			MenuMain ( bar );
		}
	);

And imagine when the callback accept a few more parameters.
[/code]

U++ is currently aiming at compliance to C++14. What if you want to use it in your project and you know your compiler/c++library are modern enough?

One way is to put the following in a header file and make sure you include it after <Core/Core.h> is included.

#ifdef THISFN
#    undef THISFN
#    define THISFN(memfun) ....
#endif




Reference:
Why use `std::bind_front` over lambdas in C++20?

[Updated on: Tue, 18 October 2022 21:19]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #59153 is a reply to message #59037] Thu, 10 November 2022 00:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
This is kind of C++20 related, I am going to reuse this thread for c++ language specific problems or what not.

Here I got a problem: how to detect if a class is Moveable?

A naive first thought would be
#include <Core/Core.h>
#include <concepts>

template <class T>
inline constexpr bool is_moveable = std::derived_from<T, Upp::Moveable<T>>;

using namespace Upp;

CONSOLE_APP_MAIN
{
	LOG(is_moveable<Upp::Rect>);
	LOG(is_moveable<Upp::String>);
}

Output
true
false

It turns out Moveable has an optional second template parameter which failed the test in [b]String[/]'s case.

What makes Moveable so special is that it introduced a friend AssertMoveable0 in <Core/Topt.h>
template <class T>
inline void AssertMoveable0(T *t) { AssertMoveablePtr(&**t, *t); }
// COMPILATION ERROR HERE MEANS TYPE T WAS NOT MARKED AS Moveable

template <class T, class B = EmptyClass>
struct Moveable : public B {
	friend void AssertMoveable0(T *) {}
};


Trying to use it directly, I come up with something like
#include <Core/Core.h>
#include <concepts>

template <class T>
inline constexpr bool is_moveable = /*std::derived_from<T, Upp::Moveable<T>>;*/
	requires (T t){ Upp::AssertMoveable0(&t); };

using namespace Upp;

CONSOLE_APP_MAIN
{
	LOG(is_moveable<Upp::Rect>);
	LOG(is_moveable<Upp::String>);
}


This time both give correct result, but unfortuately, any class T would give a true result regardless of whether it's derived from Upp::Moveable.

How would you check if a class type is Upp::Moveable ?


BTW, something like this
LOG( std::is_base_of<Ctrl, EditField>);

will fail to compile because of a missing guard in the definition of LOG in <Core/Diag.h>
#define LOG(a) UPP::VppLog() << a << UPP::EOL


I would think here change it to
#define LOG(a) UPP::VppLog() << (a) << UPP::EOL

might be a reasonable thing to do.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #59154 is a reply to message #59153] Thu, 10 November 2022 06:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Oblivion is currently offline  Oblivion
Messages: 1206
Registered: August 2007
Senior Contributor
Maybe a combination of is_constructibles can help here:

using namespace Upp;

struct A {
	A(A&&) = delete;
	A&& operator=(A&&) = delete;
};

CONSOLE_APP_MAIN
{
	StdLogSetup(LOG_COUT);
	
	bool a = std::is_constructible_v<Rect, Rect&&>;
	bool b = std::is_constructible_v<String, String&&>;
	bool c = std::is_constructible_v<A, A&&>;
	RLOG(a);
	RLOG(b);
	RLOG(c);
}


Best regards,
Oblivion

Github page: https://github.com/ismail-yilmaz
upp-components: https://github.com/ismail-yilmaz/upp-components
Bobcat the terminal emulator: https://github.com/ismail-yilmaz/Bobcat

[Updated on: Thu, 10 November 2022 06:30]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #59156 is a reply to message #59154] Thu, 10 November 2022 12:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Thank you, Oblivion! You code checks if a class have a move ctor?

I was looking for a way to check if a class T has Upp::Moveable<T, optional U> as its base class such that it can be put in a Upp::Vector<T>.

atm I believe the AssertMoveable0 path is dead end. Now the problem becomes:

There is a class T and some class U, devise a way to detect (at compile time of course) if T is defined with something like
class SomeT : public Moveable<SomeT, AnyU>
{...};

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #59157 is a reply to message #59156] Thu, 10 November 2022 21:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Some failed attempts.

template <class T>
concept UppMoveable = requires (T t){
    Upp::Vector<T> v;
    v.Add(t);
};

This will fail in compilation with a strange error message.

Turns out you cannot do variable declaration in a requires-expression.

Something like this
template <class T>
concept UppMoveable = requires (T t, Upp::Vector<T> v){
    v.Add(t);
};


compiles fine but doesn't give desired results. Compiler only check if expressions inside a requires-expression are well-formed. Evaluation doesn't take place.

So this won't work. Back to old conclusion: we need a way to check is a class T is declared/defined with something like
class MyString : public Moveable<MyString, optionalB>{...};

to determine if it can be placed in a Upp::Vector.

Here are some well written articles about concepts and requires-expression.

C++20 Concepts - a Quick Introduction

Requires-expression

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #59158 is a reply to message #59157] Fri, 11 November 2022 02:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Problem solved with a hackish modification to the definition of the Moveable template in <Core/Topt.h>
template <class T, class B = EmptyClass>
struct Moveable : public B {
	typedef B MoveableBase; // Add this line
	friend void AssertMoveable0(T *) {}
};


Now it works like a charm Smile
#include <Core/Core.h>
#include <concepts>
#include <type_traits>

template <class T>
concept UppMoveable = std::is_trivial_v<T> || requires{
	typename T::MoveableBase;
	requires std::derived_from<T,
          Upp::Moveable<T, typename T::MoveableBase>
        >;
};

CONSOLE_APP_MAIN
{
	using namespace Upp;

	struct D{
		D(){}
	};
	
	struct F{
		F() = default;
	};

	struct E : Moveable<E, D>{
		E(){}
	};
	
	
	DUMP(UppMoveable<String>);//true
	DUMP(UppMoveable<D>);//false
	DUMP(UppMoveable<F>);//true, note the difference between D and F
	DUMP(UppMoveable<E>);//true
	DUMP(UppMoveable<int64>);//true
}


This is a hack. I am still interested to know if there is a way to do it without resorting to touch <Core/Topt.h>.

[Updated on: Fri, 11 November 2022 02:59]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60922 is a reply to message #59158] Tue, 08 October 2024 18:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
OK, this is not even c++ language related. But c++ is to be blamed.

Strange padding.

#include <iostream>

struct A{
    int a;
    unsigned b:16; // for demonstration purpose only
    bool c:1;
};

int main()
{
   std::cout<<"sizeof(A) is "<<sizeof(A)<<std::endl;
}


You would expect the result be 8, but on windows MSBT22x64 and CLANG64 will give 12. (CLANG64 and GCC64 on linux give 8, which is naturally and as expected)

If you think that's not weired enough, it goes further.
#include <iostream>

struct A{
	int a;
	union{
		int dummy;
		struct{
		    unsigned v1:16;
		    bool     v2:1;
		};
	};
};


int main()
{
	A a;
	a.v2 = true;
	a.dummy = 0;
   
	std::cout<<"a.v2 is "<<a.v2<<std::endl;
}


The output is true. The compiler is smart enough to disregard the union request and put dummy and the unnamed struct object side by side, instead of start from the same address.

Maybe there is something I did wrong?

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60923 is a reply to message #60922] Tue, 08 October 2024 18:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
oh, I said c++ is to be blamed. The lack of basic binary standard is creating a lot a pains and extra work for programmers. And I don't know c++ enough to say how much additional benefits it provides by allowing compiler vendors the freedom to make their own choice on these area. It's more work for CLANG for sure, as it has to imitate vc++ on Windows and g++ otherwise.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60924 is a reply to message #60923] Tue, 08 October 2024 19:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Didier is currently offline  Didier
Messages: 726
Registered: November 2008
Location: France
Contributor
Hello Lance,

What compilers do with bit field is not covered by a standard and is implementation defined... so they do just about whatever they want.
BUT, something important is missing in you're code ! If you really want everything to be side by side, bit wise, you have to specify PACKED option on you're structs
search the web : 
__attribute__((packed, aligned(X)))
or 
__PACKED__

This will force the compiler to 'pack' all the bits together not waisting anything : so you will have a stable size.

Note : positionning of the inside the struct is implementation defined ... so some compilers put them in on order, and others the other way around Wink
==> you're code won't be very portable

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60925 is a reply to message #60924] Tue, 08 October 2024 20:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Didier wrote on Tue, 08 October 2024 13:25
Hello Lance,

What compilers do with bit field is not covered by a standard and is implementation defined... so they do just about whatever they want.
BUT, something important is missing in you're code ! If you really want everything to be side by side, bit wise, you have to specify PACKED option on you're structs
search the web : 
__attribute__((packed, aligned(X)))
or 
__PACKED__

This will force the compiler to 'pack' all the bits together not waisting anything : so you will have a stable size.

Note : positionning of the inside the struct is implementation defined ... so some compilers put them in on order, and others the other way around Wink
==> you're code won't be very portable



Thanks for your reply, Didier.

I am fine with padding. I am having issues with the way MSVC padding this one to unnecessary increase object size.

Also, for union, I expect objects taking same memory address. MSVC failed to deliver. I don't know what the standard says. But it's a tradition dated back to old C.

Are compiler free to reorder data members with the same access privileges? I will have to double check. Thanks again.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60926 is a reply to message #60925] Wed, 09 October 2024 05:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
It's less a padding issue than a bitfield issue.

The question is answered
here.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60927 is a reply to message #60926] Wed, 09 October 2024 16:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
I don't like that fact that compilers are allowed to stuff random padding bits in a bitfield as they like, but it's actually standard compliant.

In the above example, change unsigned to byte (Upp::byte of course) actually removes the extra cost on total storage usage. But the padding MSVC inserts vs GCC's sequential packed bits will result in binary incompatibilities. Worse, some old c tricks no longer work with MSVC.

A somewhat more realistic though simplified example.
class SomeFormat{
...
private:
    Font font;
    Color paper, ink, highlight;
    union{
       int32 dummy;
       struct{
           byte info1:3;
           byte info2:5;
           
           // allow individual font properties
           // to be Null for multi-tier composition
           bool faceNotNull:1;
           bool heightNotNull:1;
           bool widthNotNull:1;
           bool boldNotNull:1;
           bool strikeoutNotNull:1;
           bool underlineNotNull:1;
           bool italicNotNull:1;
           
       };
    };

    
};


In old c days, if we want to check if all Font properties are set, we can simply
bool SomeFormat::AllFontPropertiesSet()const
{
#define SOMEFORMAT_MASK (((1<<7)-1)<<8)
    return (dummy & SOMEFORMAT_MASK) == SOMEFORMAT_MASK;
#define SOMEFORMAT_MASK
}


And to mark all font properties as set(non-Null)
SomeFormat::SetAllFontProperties()
{
#define SOMEFORMAT_MASK (((1<<7)-1)<<8)
    return dummy |= SOMEFORMAT_MASK;
#define SOMEFORMAT_MASK
}


etc. With GCC, you can still do things like that. Total predictability. Fully appreciated.

End of the day, what benefits MSVC is going to achieve by padding random bits? I can see if a bitfield crosses a machine's fast-integer boundary (a few bits in previous FAST-INTEGER and a few in the following), there will be extra cpu cost involved. Other than that, what's going to be saved?

Thumbs down for MSVC on this regard.

[Updated on: Wed, 09 October 2024 16:12]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60928 is a reply to message #60927] Wed, 09 October 2024 16:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
C++23 provides a remedy to write portable bitfield code, without having to resort to unnecessary bit by bit initialization/update.

Here is an example. 
union Flags{
	int32 dummy;
	struct{
		byte	borderLeft:3;
		byte	borderRight:3;
		byte	borderTop:3;
		byte	borderBottom:3;
		byte	halign:2;
		byte	valign:2; //16th bit
	
		bool		faceNotNull:1;
		bool		boldNotNull:1;
		bool		heightNotNull:1;
		bool		widthNotNull:1;
		bool		underlineNotNull:1;
		bool		italicNotNull:1;
		bool		strikeoutNotNull:1; //23rd bit
	};
	
	Flags() : dummy(0){ static_assert(sizeof(*this)==sizeof(dummy)); }
	
	static constexpr int32 FontMask()
	{
		Flags f;
		f.faceNotNull = true;
		f.boldNotNull = true;
		f.heightNotNull = true;
		f.widthNotNull = true;
		f.underlineNotNull = true;
		f.italicNotNull = true;
		f.strikeoutNotNull = true;
		return f.dummy;
	}
	
	void Border(int border)
	{
		borderLeft = borderRight = borderTop = borderBottom = border;
	}
	
	void SetAllFontProperties()
	{
		dummy |= FontMask();
	}

	void ClearAllFontProperties()
	{
		dummy &= ~FontMask();
	}
	
	bool AllFontPropertiesSet()const
	{
		return ( dummy & FontMask() ) == FontMask();
	}
};


It's a lot more work. But there is one added benefit: if you change the bitfields definition and add a few bits in front of the font properties group, you have a better chance not to break existing code unknowingly.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60929 is a reply to message #60928] Wed, 09 October 2024 19:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Didier is currently offline  Didier
Messages: 726
Registered: November 2008
Location: France
Contributor
In fact the extra padding inserted by compilers is intented for alignement issues (although for bitfields this should not be an issue) this is why you're code works.
But apparently MSVC has his own way of working and pack(1) doesn't seem to be taken into account ... very strange

[Updated on: Wed, 09 October 2024 19:37]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60931 is a reply to message #60929] Thu, 10 October 2024 14:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Didier wrote on Wed, 09 October 2024 13:32
In fact the extra padding inserted by compilers is intented for alignement issues (although for bitfields this should not be an issue) this is why you're code works.
But apparently MSVC has his own way of working and pack(1) doesn't seem to be taken into account ... very strange

Smile

MSC is doing the same thing. It's in ISO C too. Even a c struct is an opaque object that should be accessed through functions if more than one compilers is involved.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #60932 is a reply to message #60928] Thu, 10 October 2024 14:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Lance wrote on Wed, 09 October 2024 10:17
C++23 provides a remedy to write portable bitfield code, without having to resort to unnecessary bit by bit initialization/update.

Here is an example. 
union Flags{
	int32 dummy;
	struct{
		byte	borderLeft:3;
		byte	borderRight:3;
		byte	borderTop:3;
		byte	borderBottom:3;
		byte	halign:2;
		byte	valign:2; //16th bit
	
		bool		faceNotNull:1;
		bool		boldNotNull:1;
		bool		heightNotNull:1;
		bool		widthNotNull:1;
		bool		underlineNotNull:1;
		bool		italicNotNull:1;
		bool		strikeoutNotNull:1; //23rd bit
	};
	
	Flags() : dummy(0){ static_assert(sizeof(*this)==sizeof(dummy)); }
	
	static constexpr int32 FontMask()
	{
		Flags f;
		f.faceNotNull = true;
		f.boldNotNull = true;
		f.heightNotNull = true;
		f.widthNotNull = true;
		f.underlineNotNull = true;
		f.italicNotNull = true;
		f.strikeoutNotNull = true;
		return f.dummy;
	}
	
	void Border(int border)
	{
		borderLeft = borderRight = borderTop = borderBottom = border;
	}
	
	void SetAllFontProperties()
	{
		dummy |= FontMask();
	}

	void ClearAllFontProperties()
	{
		dummy &= ~FontMask();
	}
	
	bool AllFontPropertiesSet()const
	{
		return ( dummy & FontMask() ) == FontMask();
	}
};


It's a lot more work. But there is one added benefit: if you change the bitfields definition and add a few bits in front of the font properties group, you have a better chance not to break existing code unknowingly.


with std=c++23, gcc and msvc accept the above code. But clang rejects it, for good reason. The union default constructor used in constexpr ...FontMask()const should be constexpr modified too.
	constexpr Flags() : dummy(0){
		static_assert(sizeof(*this)==sizeof(dummy)); 
       }

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #61061 is a reply to message #60932] Tue, 05 November 2024 02:25 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
I had a brief discussion with regard to constexpr with Mirek a few days ago
here

Today I did a simple test with a more complicated case.

#include <Core/Core.h>

using namespace Upp;

CONSOLE_APP_MAIN
{
	Color c(200,50,76);
	if ( c == Color(200, 50, 76) )
	{
		RLOG("Yes");
	}else{
		RLOG("NO");
	}
}


Compiled to the following 338 lines of assembly code
	.text
	.file	"TestColorConstant.cpp"
	.globl	main                            # -- Begin function main
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	main,@function
main:                                   # @main
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$32, %rsp
	movl	$0, -4(%rbp)
	movl	%edi, -8(%rbp)
	movq	%rsi, -16(%rbp)
	movq	%rdx, -24(%rbp)
	movl	-8(%rbp), %edi
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rsi
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rdx
	callq	_ZN3Upp9AppInit__EiPPKcS2_@PLT
	leaq	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v(%rip), %rdi
	callq	_ZN3Upp12AppExecute__EPFvvE@PLT
	callq	_ZN3Upp9AppExit__Ev@PLT
	callq	_ZN3Upp11GetExitCodeEv@PLT
	addq	$32, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end0:
	.size	main, .Lfunc_end0-main
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.globl	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v             # -- Begin function _Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v,@function
_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v:                    # @_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$16, %rsp
	leaq	-4(%rbp), %rdi
	movl	$200, %esi
	movl	$50, %edx
	movl	$76, %ecx
	callq	_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii
	leaq	-8(%rbp), %rdi
	movl	$200, %esi
	movl	$50, %edx
	movl	$76, %ecx
	callq	_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii
	movl	-8(%rbp), %esi
	leaq	-4(%rbp), %rdi
	callq	_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_
	testb	$1, %al
	jne	.LBB1_1
	jmp	.LBB1_2
.LBB1_1:
	callq	_ZN3Upp6VppLogEv@PLT
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	leaq	.L.str(%rip), %rsi
	callq	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	xorl	%esi, %esi
	callq	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	jmp	.LBB1_3
.LBB1_2:
	callq	_ZN3Upp6VppLogEv@PLT
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	leaq	.L.str.1(%rip), %rsi
	callq	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	xorl	%esi, %esi
	callq	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
.LBB1_3:
	addq	$16, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end1:
	.size	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v, .Lfunc_end1-_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii             # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii,@function
_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii:                    # @_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$32, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movl	%esi, -12(%rbp)
	movl	%edx, -16(%rbp)
	movl	%ecx, -20(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	movq	%rax, -32(%rbp)                 # 8-byte Spill
	movl	-12(%rbp), %eax
	movb	%al, %dl
	movl	-16(%rbp), %eax
	movb	%al, %cl
	movl	-20(%rbp), %eax
                                        # kill: def $al killed $al killed $eax
	movzbl	%dl, %edi
	movzbl	%cl, %esi
	movzbl	%al, %edx
	callq	_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh
	movl	%eax, %ecx
	movq	-32(%rbp), %rax                 # 8-byte Reload
	movl	%ecx, (%rax)
	addq	$32, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end2:
	.size	_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii, .Lfunc_end2-_ZN3Upp5ColorC2Eiii
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_,"axG",@progbits,_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_,comdat
	.weak	_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_            # -- Begin function _ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_,@function
_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_:                   # @_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	movl	%esi, -4(%rbp)
	movq	%rdi, -16(%rbp)
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rax
	movl	(%rax), %eax
	cmpl	-4(%rbp), %eax
	sete	%al
	andb	$1, %al
	movzbl	%al, %eax
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end3:
	.size	_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_, .Lfunc_end3-_ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc       # -- Begin function _ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc,@function
_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc:              # @_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$16, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movq	%rsi, -16(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rdi
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rsi
	callq	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEPKc@PLT
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$16, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end4:
	.size	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc, .Lfunc_end4-_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE   # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE,@function
_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE:          # @_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$32, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movl	%esi, -12(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rdi
	movq	%rdi, -24(%rbp)                 # 8-byte Spill
	callq	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rax                 # 8-byte Reload
	addq	$32, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end5:
	.size	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE, .Lfunc_end5-_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh                 # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh,@function
_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh:                        # @_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	movb	%dl, %al
	movb	%sil, %cl
	movb	%dil, %dl
	movb	%dl, -1(%rbp)
	movb	%cl, -2(%rbp)
	movb	%al, -3(%rbp)
	movzbl	-1(%rbp), %eax
	movzbl	-2(%rbp), %ecx
	shll	$8, %ecx
	orl	%ecx, %eax
	movzbl	-3(%rbp), %ecx
	shll	$16, %ecx
	orl	%ecx, %eax
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end6:
	.size	_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh, .Lfunc_end6-_ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv         # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv,@function
_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv:                # @_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$16, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rdi
	movl	$10, %esi
	callq	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	addq	$16, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end7:
	.size	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv, .Lfunc_end7-_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi            # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi,@function
_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi:                   # @_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$32, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movl	%esi, -12(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rcx
	movq	%rcx, -24(%rbp)                 # 8-byte Spill
	movq	24(%rcx), %rax
	cmpq	40(%rcx), %rax
	jae	.LBB8_2
# %bb.1:
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rdx                 # 8-byte Reload
	movl	-12(%rbp), %eax
	movb	%al, %cl
	movq	24(%rdx), %rax
	movq	%rax, %rsi
	addq	$1, %rsi
	movq	%rsi, 24(%rdx)
	movb	%cl, (%rax)
	jmp	.LBB8_3
.LBB8_2:
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rdi                 # 8-byte Reload
	movl	-12(%rbp), %esi
	movq	(%rdi), %rax
	callq	*(%rax)
.LBB8_3:
	addq	$32, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end8:
	.size	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi, .Lfunc_end8-_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.type	.L.str,@object                  # @.str
	.section	.rodata.str1.1,"aMS",@progbits,1
.L.str:
	.asciz	"Yes"
	.size	.L.str, 4

	.type	.L.str.1,@object                # @.str.1
.L.str.1:
	.asciz	"NO"
	.size	.L.str.1, 3

	.section	".linker-options","e",@llvm_linker_options
	.ident	"Ubuntu clang version 18.1.3 (1ubuntu1)"
	.section	".note.GNU-stack","",@progbits
	.addrsig
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp9AppInit__EiPPKcS2_
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp12AppExecute__EPFvvE
	.addrsig_sym _Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp9AppExit__Ev
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp11GetExitCodeEv
	.addrsig_sym _ZNK3Upp5ColoreqES0_
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6VppLogEv
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp3RGBEhhh
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEPKc
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi


While the if constexpr version 
#include <Core/Core.h>

using namespace Upp;

CONSOLE_APP_MAIN
{
	constexpr Color c(200,50,76);
	if constexpr ( c == Color(200, 50, 76) )
	{
		RLOG("Yes");
	}else{
		RLOG("NO");
	}
}

compiles to the following 214 lines of assembly code
	.text
	.file	"TestColorConstant.cpp"
	.globl	main                            # -- Begin function main
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	main,@function
main:                                   # @main
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$32, %rsp
	movl	$0, -4(%rbp)
	movl	%edi, -8(%rbp)
	movq	%rsi, -16(%rbp)
	movq	%rdx, -24(%rbp)
	movl	-8(%rbp), %edi
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rsi
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rdx
	callq	_ZN3Upp9AppInit__EiPPKcS2_@PLT
	leaq	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v(%rip), %rdi
	callq	_ZN3Upp12AppExecute__EPFvvE@PLT
	callq	_ZN3Upp9AppExit__Ev@PLT
	callq	_ZN3Upp11GetExitCodeEv@PLT
	addq	$32, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end0:
	.size	main, .Lfunc_end0-main
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.globl	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v             # -- Begin function _Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v,@function
_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v:                    # @_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$16, %rsp
	movl	.L__const._Z14ConsoleMainFn_v.c(%rip), %eax
	movl	%eax, -4(%rbp)
	callq	_ZN3Upp6VppLogEv@PLT
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	leaq	.L.str(%rip), %rsi
	callq	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	movq	%rax, %rdi
	xorl	%esi, %esi
	callq	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	addq	$16, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end1:
	.size	_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v, .Lfunc_end1-_Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc       # -- Begin function _ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc,@function
_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc:              # @_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$16, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movq	%rsi, -16(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rdi
	movq	-16(%rbp), %rsi
	callq	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEPKc@PLT
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rax
	addq	$16, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end2:
	.size	_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc, .Lfunc_end2-_ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE   # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE,@function
_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE:          # @_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$32, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movl	%esi, -12(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rdi
	movq	%rdi, -24(%rbp)                 # 8-byte Spill
	callq	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rax                 # 8-byte Reload
	addq	$32, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end3:
	.size	_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE, .Lfunc_end3-_ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv         # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv,@function
_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv:                # @_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$16, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rdi
	movl	$10, %esi
	callq	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	addq	$16, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end4:
	.size	_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv, .Lfunc_end4-_ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.section	.text._ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi,"axG",@progbits,_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi,comdat
	.weak	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi            # -- Begin function _ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	.p2align	4, 0x90
	.type	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi,@function
_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi:                   # @_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	.cfi_startproc
# %bb.0:
	pushq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 16
	.cfi_offset %rbp, -16
	movq	%rsp, %rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register %rbp
	subq	$32, %rsp
	movq	%rdi, -8(%rbp)
	movl	%esi, -12(%rbp)
	movq	-8(%rbp), %rcx
	movq	%rcx, -24(%rbp)                 # 8-byte Spill
	movq	24(%rcx), %rax
	cmpq	40(%rcx), %rax
	jae	.LBB5_2
# %bb.1:
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rdx                 # 8-byte Reload
	movl	-12(%rbp), %eax
	movb	%al, %cl
	movq	24(%rdx), %rax
	movq	%rax, %rsi
	addq	$1, %rsi
	movq	%rsi, 24(%rdx)
	movb	%cl, (%rax)
	jmp	.LBB5_3
.LBB5_2:
	movq	-24(%rbp), %rdi                 # 8-byte Reload
	movl	-12(%rbp), %esi
	movq	(%rdi), %rax
	callq	*(%rax)
.LBB5_3:
	addq	$32, %rsp
	popq	%rbp
	.cfi_def_cfa %rsp, 8
	retq
.Lfunc_end5:
	.size	_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi, .Lfunc_end5-_ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi
	.cfi_endproc
                                        # -- End function
	.type	.L__const._Z14ConsoleMainFn_v.c,@object # @__const._Z14ConsoleMainFn_v.c
	.section	.rodata.cst4,"aM",@progbits,4
	.p2align	2, 0x0
.L__const._Z14ConsoleMainFn_v.c:
	.long	4993736                         # 0x4c32c8
	.size	.L__const._Z14ConsoleMainFn_v.c, 4

	.type	.L.str,@object                  # @.str
	.section	.rodata.str1.1,"aMS",@progbits,1
.L.str:
	.asciz	"Yes"
	.size	.L.str, 4

	.section	".linker-options","e",@llvm_linker_options
	.ident	"Ubuntu clang version 18.1.3 (1ubuntu1)"
	.section	".note.GNU-stack","",@progbits
	.addrsig
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp9AppInit__EiPPKcS2_
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp12AppExecute__EPFvvE
	.addrsig_sym _Z14ConsoleMainFn_v
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp9AppExit__Ev
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp11GetExitCodeEv
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3UpplsERNS_6StreamEPKc
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6VppLogEv
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6StreamlsENS_7EOLenumE
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEPKc
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6Stream6PutEolEv
	.addrsig_sym _ZN3Upp6Stream3PutEi


Without going into details of assembly code, we know if constexpr indeed provides additional optimization opportunities.

Note in oder for the second example to compile, certain modifications are required in <Core/Color.h>, and a minimum std=c++20 might be required.

[Updated on: Tue, 05 November 2024 02:28]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #61062 is a reply to message #61061] Tue, 05 November 2024 02:33 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Overview of New Features in C++23

[Updated on: Mon, 02 December 2024 15:21]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #61073 is a reply to message #61062] Thu, 07 November 2024 00:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Writing a custom iterator in modern C++

Comparisons in C++20 by Barry Revzin

What is the <=> ("spaceship", three-way comparison) operator in C++?
I didn't know I also need to provide an operator == with customized spaceship operator.

Report message to a moderator

Re: Make THISFN simpler and more powerful [message #61176 is a reply to message #61073] Fri, 29 November 2024 02:30 Go to previous message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 656
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
std::print in C++23

Keeping Time in C++: How to use the std::chrono API

Github workflow files for building U++ on Windows, Linux & MacOS

How to move packages from bazaar to github repo and UppHub

[Updated on: Thu, 02 January 2025 01:48]

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic: Math - GaussJordan function
Next Topic: Clang cannot find DLLs
Goto Forum:
  

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [ RSS ] [ PDF ]

Current Time: Fri May 09 09:46:14 CEST 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01239 seconds
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.5.
Copyright ©2001-2013 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software