Can I use the operator-overloading on >>operator instead of static-cast to do input?
int input{};
std::cin >> input; // input an integer
Pet pet{ static_cast<Pet>(input) }; // static_cast our integer to a Pet
Related
In Vector CANoe, is it possible to define a function that takes a system variable argument like the system function TestWaitForSignalMatch()?
For my use case it is not sufficient to supply the current value of the system variable because I want to pass the system variable to TestWaitForSignalMatch() or similar system functions.
The CANoe help seems to show examples:
long TestWaitForSignalMatch (Signal aSignal, float aCompareValue, dword aTimeout); // form 1
long TestWaitForSignalMatch (sysvar aSysVar, float aCompareValue, dword aTimeout); // form 3
I tried like this
void foo(sysvar aSysvar) {}
^
or this
void foo(sysvar *aSysvar) {}
^
but I get a parse error at the marked position of the sysvar keyword in both cases.
I successfully created functions that take a signal argument, but unlike the syntax in the CANoe help I have to use a pointer.
This works:
void foo(signal *aSignal) {}
Obviously the documentation in the help is not correct in this point. It results in a parse error after the signal keyword when I omit the * as shown in the help:
void bar(signal aSignal) {}
^
So what's the correct syntax for defining a function that takes a sysvar argument? (if possible)
In case the version matters, I'm currently testing with CANoe 9.0.53(SP1), 9.0.135(SP7) or 10.0.125(SP6).
You have to use the correct type. You have the following possibilities to declare system variables in functions:
Integer: sysvarInt*
Float: sysvarFloat*
String: sysvarString*
Integer Array: sysvarIntArray*
Float Array: sysvarFloatArray*
Data: sysvarData*
Examples:
void PutSysVarIntArrayToByteArray (sysvarIntArray * from, byte to[], word length)
{
word ii;
for (ii = 0; ii < length; ii++)
{
to[ii] = (byte)#from[ii];
}
}
You can also write to the system variable:
void PutByteToSysVarInt (byte from, sysvarInt * to) {
#to = from;
}
See also CANoe Help page "Test Features » XML » Declaration and Transfer of CAPL Test Case and Test Function Parameters"
Yes, you can. Just define a bit further your sysvar type, not just sysvar.
System variables, with indication of type and *. Possible types:
Data, Int, Float, String, IntArray, and FloatArray. Example
declaration: sysvarFloat * sv
You didn't specify the CANoe SP version, so it may not be supported in older versions, but to make sure of this, search for Function parameter in Help/Index, then you should get the full list of possible function parameters you can use in your current CANoe setup. Should start like this:
Integers (byte, word, dword, int, long, qword, int64) Example
declaration: long 1
Integers (byte, word, dword, int, long, qword, int64) Example
declaration: long 1
Individual characters (char) Example declaration: char ch
Enums Example declaration: enum Colors c
Associative fields Example declaration: int m[float]. Associative
fields are transferred as reference automatically.
.............
System variables, with indication of type and *. Possible types:
Data, Int, Float, String, IntArray, and FloatArray. Example
declaration: sysvarFloat * sv
I have a class defined as follows
struct X {
X() : data() {}
int data;
enum class Zzz : int { zero, one, two };
Zzz zzz;
};
...
X xval;
What is the value of xval.zzz - is undefined or X::Zzz.zero ? I know it will be undefined for regular enums and I am wondering whether typed enums behave differently.
It's uninitialised.
Since the backing type is an int and that can contain a trap representation, the reading of xval.zzz prior to initialisation is undefined. (Out of interest, if the backing type was a char, unsigned char, or signed char, then the behaviour would be merely implementation defined.)
Consider this:
int func1( int i );
int func2( int i );
Conditional operator can be used like that:
int res = (cond)?func1(4):func2(4);
Or, if both may use the same parameter:
int res = ((cond)?func1:func2)(4);
Now, what about member functions of a class:
class T
{
public:
T( int i ) : i(i) {}
int memfunc1() { return 1*i; }
int memfunc2() { return 2*i; }
private:
int i;
};
I tried this, but it does not work:
T t(4);
int res2 = t.((cond)?memfunc1:memfunc2)();
...tried other syntax too ((t.*((cond)?&(T::memfunc1):&(T::memfunc2)))()) with no success...
Is that doable and then what would be the good syntax? One line code answer are preferable (using a temporary auto variable to store pointer to function would be too easy...;-)
§ 5.3.1 [expr.unary.op]/p4:
A pointer to member is only formed when an explicit & is used and its operand is a qualified-id not enclosed
in parentheses. [ Note: that is, the expression &(qualified-id), where the qualified-id is enclosed in
parentheses, does not form an expression of type “pointer to member.” Neither does qualified-id, because
there is no implicit conversion from a qualified-id for a non-static member function to the type “pointer to
member function” as there is from an lvalue of function type to the type “pointer to function” (4.3). Nor is
&unqualified-id a pointer to member, even within the scope of the unqualified-id’s class. — end note ]
If it still doesn't help, you can uncover the correct syntax below:
(t.*(cond ? &T::memfunc1 : &T::memfunc2))()
Is it possible to display value of module_param when read, in hex?
I have this code in my linux device driver:
module_param(num_in_hex, ulong, 0644)
$cat /sys/module/my_module/parameters/num_in_hex
1234512345
Would like to see that value in hex, instead of decimal. Or, should I use different way like debugfs for this?
There is no ready parameter type (2nd argument of module_param macro), which output its argument as hexadecimal. But it is not difficult to implement it.
Module parameters are driven by callback functions, which extract parameter's value from string and write parameter's value to string.
// Set hexadecimal parameter
int param_set_hex(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp)
{
return kstrtoul(val, 16, (unsigned long*)kp->arg);
}
// Read hexadecimal parameter
int param_get_hex(char *buffer, const struct kernel_param *kp)
{
return scnprintf(buffer, PAGE_SIZE, "%lx", *((unsigned long*)kp->arg));
}
// Combine operations together
const struct kernel_param_ops param_ops_hex = {
.set = param_set_hex,
.get = param_get_hex
};
/*
* Macro for check type of variable, passed to `module_param`.
* Just reuse already existed macro for `ulong` type.
*/
#define param_check_hex(name, p) param_check_ulong(name, p)
// Everything is ready for use `module_param` with new type.
module_param(num_in_hex, hex, 0644);
Check include/linux/moduleparam.h for implementation module_param macro and kernel/params.c for implementation of operations for ready-made types (macro STANDARD_PARAM_DEF).
I wish to iterate over the types in my boost::variant within my unit test. This can be done as follows:
TEST_F (MyTest, testExucutedForIntsOnly)
{
typedef boost::variant<int, char, bool, double> var;
boost::mpl::for_each<SyntaxTree::Command::types>(function());
...
}
Where function is a functor. I simply want to ensure that a particular operation occurs differently for one type in the variant with respect to all others. However, I don't like that the test is now done in another function -- and what if I wish to access members for MyTest from the functor? It seems really messy.
Any suggestions on a better approach?
So, you want to call a function on a boost::variant that is type-dependent?
Try this:
template<typename T>
struct RunOnlyOnType_Helper
{
std::function<void(T)> func;
template<typename U>
void operator()( U unused ) {}
void operator()( T t ) { func(t); }
RunOnlyOnType_Helper(std::function<void(T)> func_):func(func_){}
};
template<typename T, typename Variant>
void RunOnlyOnType( Variant v, std::function< void(T) > func )
{
boost::apply_visitor( RunOnlyOnType_Helper<T>(func), v );
}
The idea is that RunOnlyOnType is a function that takes a variant and a functor on a particular type from the variant, and executes the functor if and only if the type of the variant matches the functor.
Then you can do this:
typedef boost::variant<int, char, bool, double> var;
var v(int(7)); // create a variant which is an int that has value 7
std::string bob = "you fool!\n";
RunOnlyOnType<int>( v, [&](int value)->void
{
// code goes here, and it can see variables from enclosing scope
// the value of v as an int is passed in as the argument value
std::cout << "V is an int with value " << value << " and bob says " << bob;
});
Is that what you want?
Disclaimer: I have never touched boost::variant before, the above has not been compiled, and this is based off of quickly reading the boost docs. In addition, the use of std::function above is sub-optimal (you should be able to use templated functors all the way down -- heck, you can probably extract the type T from the type signature of the functor).