I have a variadic function from a third-party C library:
int func(int argc, ...);
argc indicates the number of passed optional arguments.
I’m wrapping it with a macro that counts the number of arguments, as suggested here. For reading convenience, here’s the macro:
#define PP_ARG_N( \
_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, N, ...) N
#define PP_RSEQ_N() \
63, 62, 61, 60, \
59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, \
49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, \
39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, \
29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, \
19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, \
9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0
#define PP_NARG_(...) PP_ARG_N(__VA_ARGS__)
#define PP_NARG(...) PP_NARG_(__VA_ARGS__, PP_RSEQ_N())
and I’m wrapping it like so:
#define my_func(...) func(PP_NARG(__VA_ARGS__), __VA_ARGS__)
The PP_NARG macro works great for functions accepting one or more arguments. For instance, PP_NARG("Hello", "World") evaluates to 2.
The problem is that when no arguments are passed, PP_NARG() evaluates to 1 instead of 0.
I understand how this macro works, but I can’t come up with an idea to modify it so that it behaves correctly for this case as well.
Any ideas?
EDIT:
I have found a workaround for PP_NARG, and posted it as an answer.
I still have problems with wrapping the variadic function though. When __VA_ARGS__ is empty, my_func expands to func(0, ) which triggers a compilation error.
Another possibility, which does not use
sizeofnor a GCC extension is to add the following to your codeThe result is
Explanation:
The trick in these macros is that
PP_HASCOMMA(...)expands to 0 when called with zero or one argument and to 1 when called with at least two arguments. To distinguish between these two cases, I usedPP_COMMA __VA_ARGS__ (), which returns a comma when__VA_ARGS__is empty and returns nothing when__VA_ARGS__is non-empty.Now there are three possible cases:
__VA_ARGS__is empty:PP_HASCOMMA(__VA_ARGS__)returns 0 andPP_HASCOMMA(PP_COMMA __VA_ARGS__ ())returns 1.__VA_ARGS__contains one argument:PP_HASCOMMA(__VA_ARGS__)returns 0 andPP_HASCOMMA(PP_COMMA __VA_ARGS__ ())returns 0.__VA_ARGS__contains two or more arguments:PP_HASCOMMA(__VA_ARGS__)returns 1 andPP_HASCOMMA(PP_COMMA __VA_ARGS__ ())returns 1.The
PP_NARG_HELPERxmacros are just needed to resolve these cases.Edit:
In order to fix the
func(0, )problem, we need to test whether we have supplied zeroor more arguments. The
PP_ISZEROmacro comes into play here.Now let’s define another macro which prepends the number of arguments to an argument list:
The many helpers are again needed to expand the macros to numeric values. Finally test it:
Online example:
http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/73b4b6d75d45a1c8
See also:
Please have also a look at the P99 project, which has much more
advanced preprocessor solutions, like these.