问题
I developed a scripting engine that has many built-in functions, so to call any function, my code just went into an if .. else if .. else if wall checking the name but I would like to develop a more efficient solution.
Should I use a hashmap with strings as keys and pointers as values? How could I do it by using an STL map?
EDIT: Another point that came into my mind: of course using a map will force the compiler not to inline functions, but my inefficient approach didn\'t have any overhead generated by the necessity of function calls, it just executes code.
So I wonder if the overhead generated by the function call will be any better than having an if..else chain.. otherwise I could minimize the number of comparisons by checking a character at runtime (will be longer but faster).
回答1:
Whatever your function signatures are:
typedef void (*ScriptFunction)(void); // function pointer type
typedef std::unordered_map<std::string, ScriptFunction> script_map;
// ...
void some_function()
{
}
// ...
script_map m;
m.emplace("blah", &some_function);
// ...
void call_script(const std::string& pFunction)
{
auto iter = m.find(pFunction);
if (iter == m.end())
{
// not found
}
(*iter->second)();
}
Note that the ScriptFunction type could be generalized to std::function</* whatever*/> so you can support any callable thing, not just exactly function pointers.
回答2:
You can also use Boost.Function and Boost.Bind what even allows you, to some degree, to have map of heterogeneous functions:
typedef boost::function<void, void> fun_t;
typedef std::map<std::string, fun_t> funs_t;
funs_t f;
void foo() {}
void goo(std::string& p) {}
void bar(int& p) {}
f["foo"] = foo;
f["goo"] = boost::bind(goo, "I am goo");
f["bar"] = boost::bind(bar, int(17));
It can be a map of functions of compatible prototypes as well, of course.
回答3:
In C++11 you can do something like this : This Interface needs only the return type and it takes care of everything else from the caller side.
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <map>
#include <vector>
#include <typeinfo>
#include <typeindex>
#include <cassert>
void fun1(void){
std::cout<<"inside fun1\n";
}
int fun2(){
std::cout<<"inside fun2\n";
return 2;
}
int fun3(int a){
std::cout<<"inside fun3\n";
return a;
}
std::vector<int> fun4(){
std::cout<<"inside fun4\n";
std::vector<int> v(4,100);
return v;
}
// every function pointer will be stored as this type
typedef void (*voidFunctionType)(void);
struct Interface{
std::map<std::string,std::pair<voidFunctionType,std::type_index>> m1;
template<typename T>
void insert(std::string s1, T f1){
auto tt = std::type_index(typeid(f1));
m1.insert(std::make_pair(s1,
std::make_pair((voidFunctionType)f1,tt)));
}
template<typename T,typename... Args>
T searchAndCall(std::string s1, Args&&... args){
auto mapIter = m1.find(s1);
/*chk if not end*/
auto mapVal = mapIter->second;
// auto typeCastedFun = reinterpret_cast<T(*)(Args ...)>(mapVal.first);
auto typeCastedFun = (T(*)(Args ...))(mapVal.first);
//compare the types is equal or not
assert(mapVal.second == std::type_index(typeid(typeCastedFun)));
return typeCastedFun(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
};
int main(){
Interface a1;
a1.insert("fun1",fun1);
a1.insert("fun2",fun2);
a1.insert("fun3",fun3);
a1.insert("fun4",fun4);
a1.searchAndCall<void>("fun1");
int retVal = a1.searchAndCall<int>("fun3",2);
a1.searchAndCall<int>("fun2");
auto temp = a1.searchAndCall<std::vector<int>>("fun4");
return 0;
}
回答4:
Above answers seem to give a complete overview, this regards only your second question:
Map element retrieval by key has O(log n) complexity. Hashmap retrieval by key has O(1) complexity + a little stuff on the side in case of collisions. So if theres a good hash function for your function names, use it. Your implementation will have a standard one. It should be fine.
But be aware, that anything below a hundred elements will not benefit all too much.
The only downside of a hash map is collision. In your case, the hashmap will be relatively static. You know the function names you support. So I advise you to create a simple test case, where you call unordered_map<...>::hash_function with all your keys to make sure that nothing collides. After that, you can forget about it.
A quick google for potential improvements on hash functions got me there:
A fiew good hash functions
Maybe, depending on your naming conventions, you can improve on some aspects of the function.
回答5:
Well, you can use any_map to store functions with different signatures (but calling it will be messy) and you can use int_map to call functions with a specific signature (looks nicer).
int FuncA()
{
return 1;
}
float FuncB()
{
return 2;
}
int main()
{
// Int map
map<string,int(*)()> int_map;
int_map["A"] = FuncA;
// Call it
cout<<int_map["A"]()<<endl;
// Add it to your map
map<string, void(*)> any_map;
any_map["A"] = FuncA;
any_map["B"] = FuncB;
// Call
cout<<reinterpret_cast<float(*)()>(any_map["B"])()<<endl;
}
回答6:
I tried to use the second answer with c++11. I had to change the last line
from:
(*iter)();
to:
(*iter->second)();
so the code is now:
#include <map>
typedef void (*ScriptFunction)(void); // function pointer type
typedef std::map<std::string, ScriptFunction> script_map;
// ...
void some_function(void)
{
}
script_map m;
void call_script(const std::string& pFunction)
{
script_map::const_iterator iter = m.find(pFunction);
if (iter == m.end())
{
// not found
}
(*iter->second)();
}
int main(int argc, const char * argv[])
{
//..
m.insert(std::make_pair("blah", &some_function));
call_script("blah");
//..
return 0;
}
回答7:
I've managed to modify the example from Mohit to work on member function pointers:
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <map>
#include <vector>
#include <typeinfo>
#include <typeindex>
#include <cassert>
template <typename A>
using voidFunctionType = void (A::*)(void);
template <typename A>
struct Interface{
std::map<std::string,std::pair<voidFunctionType<A>,std::type_index>> m1;
template<typename T>
void insert(std::string s1, T f1){
auto tt = std::type_index(typeid(f1));
m1.insert(std::make_pair(s1,
std::make_pair((voidFunctionType<A>)f1,tt)));
}
template<typename T,typename... Args>
T searchAndCall(A a, std::string s1, Args&&... args){
auto mapIter = m1.find(s1);
auto mapVal = mapIter->second;
auto typeCastedFun = (T(A::*)(Args ...))(mapVal.first);
assert(mapVal.second == std::type_index(typeid(typeCastedFun)));
return (a.*typeCastedFun)(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
}
};
class someclass {
public:
void fun1(void);
int fun2();
int fun3(int a);
std::vector<int> fun4();
};
void someclass::fun1(void){
std::cout<<"inside fun1\n";
}
int someclass::fun2(){
std::cout<<"inside fun2\n";
return 2;
}
int someclass::fun3(int a){
std::cout<<"inside fun3\n";
return a;
}
std::vector<int> someclass::fun4(){
std::cout<<"inside fun4\n";
std::vector<int> v(4,100);
return v;
}
int main(){
Interface<someclass> a1;
a1.insert("fun3",&someclass::fun3);
someclass s;
int retVal = a1.searchAndCall<int>(s, "fun3", 3);
return 0;
}
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/2136998/using-a-stl-map-of-function-pointers