Conditional compile-time inclusion/exclusion of code based on template argument(s)?

Question

Consider the following class, with the inner struct Y being used as a type, eg. in templates, later on:

template
class X{
  templat         


        

Answer 1

You can use a meta function (here: inlined boost::mpl::if_c, but could be arbitrarily complex) to select the one you want. You need some scaffolding to be able to use constructors, though:

template <int I>
class X {
    template <typename T1>
    class YforIeq1 { /* meat of the class */ };
    template <typename T1, typename T2>
    class YforIeq2 { /* meat of the class */ };
public:
    template <typename T1, typename T2=boost::none_t/*e.g.*/>
    struct Y : boost::mpl::if_c<I==1,YforIeq1<T1>,YforIeq2<T1,T2> >::type {
        typedef typename mpl::if_c<I==1,YforIeq1<T1>,YforIeq2<T1,T2> >::type YBase;
        /* ctor forwarding: C++0x */
        using YBase::YBase;
        /* ctor forwarding: C++03 (runs into perfect fwd'ing problem)*/
        Y() : YBase() {}
        template <typename A1>
        Y(const A1&a1) : YBase(a1) {}
        template <typename A1, typename A2>
        Y(const A1&a1, const A2&a2) : YBase(a1,a2) {}
        // ...
    };
};

If there's a problem with both YforIeqN being instantiated for each X, then you can try wrapping them as a nullary meta function (something along the way mpl::apply does) and use mpl::eval_if_c.

Answer 2

Here you go:

http://ideone.com/AdEfl

And the code:

#include <iostream>

template <int I>
struct Traits
{
  struct inner{};
};

template <>
struct Traits<1>
{
  struct inner{
    template<class T1>
    struct impl{
      impl() { std::cout << "impl<T1>" << std::endl; }
    };
  };
};

template <>
struct Traits<2>
{
  struct inner{
    template<class T1, class T2>
    struct impl{
      impl() { std::cout << "impl<T1, T2>" << std::endl; }
    };
  };
};

template<class T>
struct Test{};

template<class T, class K>
struct Foo{};

template<int I>
struct arg{};

template<
  template<class, class> class T,
  class P1, int I
>
struct Test< T<P1, arg<I> > >{
  typedef typename Traits<I>::inner inner;      
};

template<
  template<class, class> class T,
  class P2, int I
>
struct Test< T<arg<I>, P2 > >{
  typedef typename Traits<I>::inner inner;      
};

// and a bunch of other partial specializations

int main(){

  typename Test<Foo<int, arg<1> > >::inner::impl<int> b;
  typename Test<Foo<int, arg<2> > >::inner::impl<int, double> c;
}

Explanation: Basically it's an extension of the idea of partial specialization, however the difference is that rather than specializing within Test, delegate to a specific class that can be specialized on I alone. That way you only need to define versions of inner for each I once. Then multiple specializations of Test can re-use. The inner holder is used to make the typedef in the Test class easier to handle.

EDIT: here is a test case that shows what happens if you pass in the wrong number of template arguments: http://ideone.com/QzgNP

Answer 3

Can you try below (it is not partial specialization):

template<int I>
class X
{
};

template<>
class X<1>
{
  template<class T1>
  struct Y{};
};

template<>
class X<2>
{
  template<class T1, class T2>
  struct Y{};
};

I doubt if the answer is that simple !!

Edit (Mocking Partial specialization): @Xeo, I was able to compile following code and seems to be fullfilling.

template<int I>
struct X
{
  struct Unused {};  // this mocking structure will never be used

  template<class T1, class T2 = Unused>  // if 2 params passed-->ok; else default='Unused'
  struct Y{};

  template<class T1> 
  struct Y<T1, Unused>{}; // This is specialization of above, define it your way
};

int main()
{
  X<1>::Y<int> o1;  // Y<T1 = int, T2 = Unused> called
  X<2>::Y<int, float> o2; // Y<T1 = int, T2 = float> called
}

Here, however you can use X<1>, X<2> interchangeably. But in the broader example you mentioned, that is irrelevant. Still if you need, you can put checks for I = 1 and I = 2.

Answer 4

How about this approach - http://sergey-miryanov.blogspot.com/2009/03/template-class-overriding.html? (sorry for russian)

Answer 5

There are two problems here:

1. enable_if works with partial specialization, not primary templates.
2. The number of externally-visible arguments is determined by the primary template, of which there may be only one.

Answer 1.

As you suggested in chat, a linked list of templates can emulate the variadic parameter pack.

template<int I>
class X{
  template<class list, class = void>
  struct Y;

  template<class list>
  struct Y< list, typename std::enable_if<I==1>::type > {
      typedef typename list::type t1;
  };

  template<class list>
  struct Y< list, typename std::enable_if<I==2>::type > {
      typedef typename list::type t1;
      typedef typename list::next::type t2;
  };
};

If you end up with next::next::next garbage, it's easy to write a metafunction, or use Boost MPL.

---

Answer 2.

The different-arity templates can be named similarly but still stay distinct if they are nested inside the SFINAE-controlled type.

template<int I>
class X{
  template<typename = void, typename = void>
  struct Z;

  template<typename v>
  struct Z< v, typename std::enable_if<I==1>::type > {
      template<class T1>
      struct Y{};
  };

  template<typename v>
  struct Z< v, typename std::enable_if<I==2>::type > {
      template<class T1, class T2>
      struct Y{};
  };
};

X<1>::Z<>::Y< int > a;
X<2>::Z<>::Y< char, double > b;