1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
|
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<title>value_initialized</title>
</head>
<body vlink="#800080" link="#0000ff" text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<h2><img src="../../boost.png" width="276" height="86">
Header <<a href="../../boost/utility/value_init.hpp">boost/utility/value_init.hpp</a>>
</h2>
<h2>Contents</h2>
<dl>
<dt><a href="#rationale">Rationale</a></dt>
<dt><a href="#intro">Introduction</a></dt>
<dt><a href="#details">Details</a></dt>
</dl>
<ul>
<li><a href="#valueinit">value-initialization</a></li>
<li><a href="#valueinitsyn">value-initialization syntax</a></li>
<li><a href="#compiler_issues">compiler issues</a></li>
</ul>
<dl class="page-index">
<dt><a href="#types">Types</a></dt>
</dl>
<ul>
<li><a href="#val_init"><code>value_initialized<T></code></a></li>
</ul>
<a href="#acknowledgements">Acknowledgements</a><br>
<br>
<hr>
<h2><a name="rationale"></a>Rationale</h2>
<p>Constructing and initializing objects in a generic way is difficult in
C++. The problem is that there are several different rules that apply
for initialization. Depending on the type, the value of a newly constructed
object can be zero-initialized (logically 0), default-constructed (using
the default constructor), or indeterminate. When writing generic code,
this problem must be addressed. The template <code>value_initialized</code> provides
a solution with consistent syntax for value initialization of scalar,
union and class types.
Moreover, <code>value_initialized</code> offers a workaround to various
compiler issues regarding value-initialization.
<br>
</p>
<h2><a name="intro"></a>Introduction</h2>
<p>
There are various ways to initialize a variable, in C++. The following
declarations all <em>may</em> have a local variable initialized to its default
value:
<pre>
T1 var1;
T2 var2 = 0;
T3 var3 = {};
T4 var4 = T4();
</pre>
Unfortunately, whether or not any of those declarations correctly
initialize the variable very much depends on its type. The first
declaration is valid for any <a href="http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/DefaultConstructible.html">
DefaultConstructible</a> type (by definition).
However, it does not always do an initialization!
It correctly initializes the variable when it's an instance of a
class, and the author of the class has provided a proper default
constructor. On the other hand, the value of <code>var1</code> is <em>indeterminate</em> when
its type is an arithmetic type, like <code>int</code>, <code>float</code>, or <code>char</code>.
An arithmetic variable
is of course initialized properly by the second declaration, <code>T2
var2 = 0</code>. But this initialization form usually won't work for a
class type (unless the class was especially written to support being
initialized that way). The third form, <code>T3 var3 = {}</code>
initializes an aggregate, typically a "C-style" <code>struct</code> or a "C-style" array.
However, the syntax is not allowed for a class that has an explicitly declared
constructor. (But watch out for an upcoming C++ language change,
by Bjarne Stroustrup et al [<a href="#references">1</a>]!)
The fourth form is the most generic form of them, as it
can be used to initialize arithmetic types, class types, aggregates, pointers, and
other types. The declaration, <code>T4 var4 = T4()</code>, should be read
as follows: First a temporary object is created, by <code>T4()</code>.
This object is <a href="#valueinit">value-initialized</a>. Next the temporary
object is copied to the named variable, <code>var4</code>. Afterwards, the temporary
is destroyed. While the copying and the destruction are likely to
be optimized away, C++ still requires the type <code>T4</code> to be
<a href="CopyConstructible.html">CopyConstructible</a>.
(So <code>T4</code> needs to be <em>both</em> DefaultConstructible <em>and</em> CopyConstructible.)
A class may not be CopyConstructible, for example because it may have a
private and undefined copy constructor,
or because it may be derived from <a href="utility.htm#Class_noncopyable">boost::noncopyable</a>.
Scott Meyers [<a href="#references">2</a>] explains why a class would be defined like that.
</p>
<p>
There is another, less obvious disadvantage to the fourth form, <code>T4 var4 = T4()</code>:
It suffers from various <a href="#compiler_issues">compiler issues</a>, causing
a variable to be left uninitialized in some compiler specific cases.
</p>
<p>
The template <a href="#val_init"><code>value_initialized</code></a>
offers a generic way to initialize
an object, like <code>T4 var4 = T4()</code>, but without requiring its type
to be CopyConstructible. And it offers a workaround to those compiler issues
regarding value-initialization as well! It allows getting an initialized
variable of any type; it <em>only</em> requires the type to be DefaultConstructible.
A properly <em>value-initialized</em> object of type <code>T</code> is
constructed by the following declaration:
<pre>
value_initialized<T> var;
</pre>
</p>
<h2><a name="details"></a>Details</h2>
<p>The C++ standard [<a href="#references">3</a>] contains the definitions
of <code>zero-initialization</code> and <code>default-initialization</code>.
Informally, zero-initialization means that the object is given the initial
value 0 (converted to the type) and default-initialization means that
POD [<a href="#references">4</a>] types are zero-initialized, while non-POD class
types are initialized with their corresponding default constructors. A
<i>declaration</i> can contain an <i>initializer</i>, which specifies the
object's initial value. The initializer can be just '()', which states that
the object shall be value-initialized (but see below). However, if a <i>declaration</i>
has no <i>initializer</i> and it is of a non-<code>const</code>, non-<code>static</code>
POD type, the initial value is indeterminate: <cite>(see §8.5, [dcl.init], for the
accurate definitions).</cite></p>
<pre>int x ; // no initializer. x value is indeterminate.<br>std::string s ; // no initializer, s is default-constructed.<br><br>int y = int() ; <br>// y is initialized using copy-initialization<br>// but the temporary uses an empty set of parentheses as the initializer,<br>// so it is default-constructed.<br>// A default constructed POD type is zero-initialized,<br>// therefore, y == 0.<br><br>void foo ( std::string ) ;<br>foo ( std::string() ) ; <br>// the temporary string is default constructed <br>// as indicated by the initializer () </pre>
<h3><a name="valueinit">value-initialization</a></h3>
<p>The first <a
href="http://anubis.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html">Technical
Corrigendum for the C++ Standard</a> (TC1), whose draft was released to
the public in November 2001, introduced <a
href="http://anubis.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/cwg_defects.html#178">Core
Issue 178</a> (among many other issues, of course).</p>
<p> That issue introduced the new concept of <code>value-initialization</code>
(it also fixed the wording for zero-initialization). Informally, value-initialization
is similar to default-initialization with the exception that in some cases
non-static data members and base class sub-objects are also value-initialized.
The difference is that an object that is value-initialized won't have
(or at least is less likely to have) indeterminate values for data members
and base class sub-objects; unlike the case of an object default constructed.
(see Core Issue 178 for a normative description).</p>
<p>In order to specify value-initialization of an object we need to use the
empty-set initializer: (). </p>
<p>As before, a declaration with no intializer specifies default-initialization,
and a declaration with a non-empty initializer specifies copy (=xxx) or
direct (xxx) initialization. </p>
<pre>template<class T> void eat(T);<br>int x ; // indeterminate initial value.<br>std::string s; // default-initialized.<br>eat ( int() ) ; // value-initialized<br>eat ( std::string() ) ; // value-initialized</pre>
<h4><a name="valueinitsyn">value-initialization</a> syntax</h4>
<p>Value initialization is specified using (). However, the empty set of
parentheses is not permitted by the syntax of initializers because it is
parsed as the declaration of a function taking no arguments: </p>
<pre>int x() ; // declares function int(*)()</pre>
<p>Thus, the empty () must be put in some other initialization context.</p>
<p>One alternative is to use copy-initialization syntax:</p>
<pre>int x = int() ;</pre>
<p>This works perfectly fine for POD types. But for non-POD class types,
copy-initialization searches for a suitable constructor, which could be,
for instance, the copy-constructor (it also searches for a suitable conversion
sequence but this doesn't apply in this context). For an arbitrary unknown
type, using this syntax may not have the value-initialization effect intended
because we don't know if a copy from a default constructed object is exactly
the same as a default constructed object, and the compiler is allowed (in
some cases), but never required to, optimize the copy away.</p>
<p>One possible generic solution is to use value-initialization of a non static
data member:</p>
<pre>template<class T> <br>struct W <br>{<br> // value-initialization of 'data' here.<br> W() : data() {}<br> T data ;<br>} ;<br>W<int> w ;<br>// w.data is value-initialized for any type. </pre>
<p>This is the solution as it was supplied by earlier versions of the
<code>value_initialized<T></code> template
class. Unfortunately this approach suffered from various compiler issues.</p>
<h4><a name="compiler_issues">compiler issues</a> </h4>
Various compilers haven't yet fully implemented value-initialization.
So when an object should be <em>value-initialized</em> (according to the C++ Standard),
it <em>may</em> in practice still be left uninitialized, because of those
compiler issues! It's hard to make a general statement on what those issues
are like, because they depend on the compiler you are using, its version number,
and the type of object you would like to have value-initialized.
Compilers usually support value-initialization for built-in types properly.
But objects of user-defined types that involve <em>aggregates</em> may <em>in some cases</em>
be partially, or even entirely left uninitialized, when they should be value-initialized.
</p>
<p>
We have encountered issues regarding value-initialization on compilers by
Microsoft, Sun, Borland, and GNU. Here is a list of bug reports on those issues:
<table summary="Compiler bug reports regarding value-initialization" border="0" cellpadding="7" cellspacing="1" >
<tr><td>
<a href="https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=100744">
Microsoft Feedback ID 100744 - Value-initialization in new-expression</a>
<br>Reported by Pavel Kuznetsov (MetaCommunications Engineering), 2005-07-28
<br>
<a href="http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=30111">
GCC Bug 30111 - Value-initialization of POD base class doesn't initialize members</a>
<br>Reported by Jonathan Wakely, 2006-12-07
<br>
<a href="http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33916">
GCC Bug 33916 - Default constructor fails to initialize array members</a>
<br>Reported by Michael Elizabeth Chastain, 2007-10-26
<br>
<a href="http://qc.codegear.com/wc/qcmain.aspx?d=51854">
Borland Report 51854 - Value-initialization: POD struct should be zero-initialized</a>
<br>Reported by Niels Dekker (LKEB, Leiden University Medical Center), 2007-09-11
<br>
</td></tr></table>
</p><p>
New versions of <code>value_initialized</code>
(Boost release version 1.35 or higher)
offer a workaround to these issues: <code>value_initialized</code> will now clear
its internal data, prior to constructing the object that it contains.
</p>
<h2><a name="types"></a>Types</h2>
<h2><a name="val_init"><code>template class value_initialized<T></code></a></h2>
<pre>namespace boost {<br><br>template<class T><br>class value_initialized<br>{<br> public :<br> value_initialized() : x() {}<br> operator T&() const { return x ; }<br> T& data() const { return x ; }<br><br> private :<br> <i>unspecified</i> x ;<br>} ;<br><br>template<class T><br>T const& get ( value_initialized<T> const& x )<br>{<br> return x.data() ;<br>}<br><br>template<class T><br>T& get ( value_initialized<T>& x )<br>{<br> return x.data() ;<br>}<br><br>} // namespace boost<br></pre>
<p>An object of this template class is a <code>T</code>-wrapper convertible
to <code>'T&'</code> whose wrapped object (data member of type <code>T</code>)
is <a href="#valueinit">value-initialized</a> upon default-initialization
of this wrapper class: </p>
<pre>int zero = 0 ;<br>value_initialized<int> x ;<br>assert ( x == zero ) ;<br><br>std::string def ;<br>value_initialized< std::string > y ;<br>assert ( y == def ) ;<br></pre>
<p>The purpose of this wrapper is to provide a consistent syntax for value
initialization of scalar, union and class types (POD and non-POD) since
the correct syntax for value initialization varies (see <a
href="#valueinitsyn">value-initialization syntax</a>)</p>
<p>The wrapped object can be accessed either through the conversion operator
<code>T&</code>, the member function <code>data()</code>, or the
non-member function <code>get()</code>: </p>
<pre>void watch(int);<br>value_initialized<int> x;<br><br>watch(x) ; // operator T& used.<br>watch(x.data());<br>watch( get(x) ) // function get() used</pre>
<p>Both <code>const</code> and non-<code>const</code> objects can be wrapped.
Mutable objects can be modified directly from within the wrapper but constant
objects cannot:</p>
<pre>value_initialized<int> x ; <br>static_cast<int&>(x) = 1 ; // OK<br>get(x) = 1 ; // OK<br><br>value_initialized<int const> y ; <br>static_cast<int&>(y) = 1 ; // ERROR: cannot cast to int&<br>static_cast<int const&>(y) = 1 ; // ERROR: cannot modify a const value<br>get(y) = 1 ; // ERROR: cannot modify a const value</pre>
<h3>Warning:</h3>
<p>Both the conversion operator and the <code>data()</code> member function
are <code>const</code> in order to allow access to the wrapped object
from a constant wrapper:</p>
<pre>void foo(int);<br>value_initialized<int> const x ;<br>foo(x);<br></pre>
<p>But notice that this conversion operator is to <code>T&</code> although
it is itself <code>const</code>. As a consequence, if <code>T</code> is
a non-<code>const</code> type, you can modify the wrapped object even from
within a constant wrapper:</p>
<pre>value_initialized<int> const x_c ;<br>int& xr = x_c ; // OK, conversion to int& available even though x_c is itself const.<br>xr = 2 ; </pre>
<p>The reason for this obscure behavior is that some commonly used compilers
just don't accept the following valid code:</p>
<pre>struct X<br>{<br> operator int&() ;<br> operator int const&() const ; <br>};<br>X x ;<br>(x == 1 ) ; // ERROR HERE!</pre>
<p>These compilers complain about ambiguity between the conversion operators.
This complaint is incorrect, but the only workaround that I know of is
to provide only one of them, which leads to the obscure behavior just explained.<br>
</p>
<h3>Recommended practice: The non-member get() idiom</h3>
<p>The obscure behavior of being able to modify a non-<code>const</code>
wrapped object from within a constant wrapper can be avoided if access to
the wrapped object is always performed with the <code>get()</code> idiom:</p>
<pre>value_initialized<int> x ;<br>get(x) = 1 ; // OK<br><br>value_initialized<int const> cx ;<br>get(x) = 1 ; // ERROR: Cannot modify a const object<br><br>value_initialized<int> const x_c ;<br>get(x_c) = 1 ; // ERROR: Cannot modify a const object<br><br>value_initialized<int const> const cx_c ;<br>get(cx_c) = 1 ; // ERROR: Cannot modify a const object<br></pre>
<h3><a name="references">References</a></h3>
[1] Bjarne Stroustrup, Gabriel Dos Reis, and J. Stephen Adamczyk wrote
various papers, proposing to extend the support for brace-enclosed <em>initializer lists</em>
in the next version of C++.
This would allow a variable <code>var</code> of any DefaultConstructible type
<code>T</code> to be <em>value-initialized</em> by doing <code>T var = {}</code>.
The papers are listed at Bjarne's web page,
<a href="http://www.research.att.com/~bs/WG21.html">My C++ Standards committee papers</a> <br>
[2] Scott Meyers, Effective C++, Third Edition, item 6,
<em>Explicitly disallow the use of compiler-generated functions you do not want</em>,
<a href="http://www.aristeia.com/books.html">Scott Meyers: Books and CDs</a> <br>
[3] The C++ Standard, Second edition (2003), ISO/IEC 14882:2003 <br>
[4] POD stands for "Plain Old Data"
<h3><a name="acknowledgements"></a>Acknowledgements</h3>
value_initialized was developed by Fernando Cacciola, with help and
suggestions from David Abrahams and Darin Adler.<br>
Special thanks to Björn Karlsson who carefully edited and completed this documentation.
<p>value_initialized was reimplemented by Fernando Cacciola and Niels Dekker
for Boost release version 1.35 (2008), offering a workaround to various compiler issues.
</p>
<p>Developed by <a href="mailto:fernando_cacciola@hotmail.com">Fernando Cacciola</a>,
the latest version of this file can be found at <a
href="http://www.boost.org">www.boost.org</a>.
</p>
<hr>
<p>Revised 15 January 2008</p>
<p>© Copyright Fernando Cacciola, 2002, 2008.</p>
<p>Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. See
<a href="http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt">www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt</a></p>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
|
