Protect CRTP pattern from stack overflowing in “pu

问题:

Consider the following standard CRTP example:

#include <iostream>

template<class Derived>
struct Base {
    void f() { static_cast<Derived *>(this)->f(); }
    void g() { static_cast<Derived *>(this)->g(); }
};

struct Foo : public Base<Foo> {
    void f() { std::cout << 42 << std::endl; }
};

int main() {
    Foo foo;
    foo.f(); // just OK
    foo.g(); // this will stack overflow and segfault
}

If this was regular virtual inheritance I could have mark virtual f and g methods as pure like

struct Base {
    virtual void f() = 0;
    virtual void g() = 0;
};

and get a compile time error about Foo being abstract. But CRTP offers no such protection. Can I implement it somehow? Runtime check is acceptable too. I thought about comparing this->f pointer with static_cast<Derived *>(this)->f, but didn't manage to make it work.

回答1:

Here is another possibility:

#include <iostream>

template<class Derived>
struct Base {
    auto f() { return static_cast<Derived *>(this)->f(); }
    auto g() { return static_cast<Derived *>(this)->g(); }
};

struct Foo : public Base<Foo> {
    void f() { std::cout << 42 << std::endl; }
};

int main() {
    Foo foo;
    foo.f(); // just OK
    foo.g(); // this will not compile
}

For GCC, it gives a pretty clear error message ("error: use of 'auto Base::g() [with Derived = Foo]' before deduction of 'auto'"), while for Clang, it gives a slightly less readable infinitely recursing template instantiation of Base<Foo>::g, with g instantiating itself but eventually ending in an error.

回答2:

You can assert at compile time that the two pointers to member functions are different, e.g.:

template<class Derived>
struct Base {
    void g() {
        static_assert(&Derived::g != &Base<Derived>::g,
                      "Derived classes must implement g()."); 
        static_cast<Derived *>(this)->g(); 
    }
};

回答3:

You could use this solution, you can have pure "non-virtual abstract" function, and it maps as much as possible to CRTP this recommendation of H. Sutter:

template<class Derived>
struct Base
  {
  void f(){static_cast<Derived*>(this)->do_f();}
  void g(){static_cast<Derived*>(this)->do_g();}

  private:
  //Derived must implement do_f
  void do_f()=delete;
  //do_g as a default implementation
  void do_g(){}
  };

struct derived
  :Base<derived>
  {
  friend struct Base<derived>;

  private:
  void do_f(){}
  };

回答4:

You could consider doing something like this instead. You can make Derived a member and either supply it as a template parameter directly each time you instantiate a Base or else use a type alias as I have done in this example:

template<class Derived>
struct Base {
    void f() { d.f(); }
    void g() { d.g(); }
private:
    Derived d;
};

struct FooImpl {
    void f() { std::cout << 42 << std::endl; }
};

using Foo = Base<FooImpl>;

int main() {
    Foo foo;
    foo.f(); // OK
    foo.g(); // compile time error
}

Of course Derived is no longer derived so you might pick a better name for it.