I'm working on a segment-based memory allocator for C++. In this allocator, when you deallocate a chunk of memory, you have to know which segment it came from. Therefore, I'm storing a pointer to the segment as a member of the fancy pointer returned from the allocator's allocate function.
Just to show the interface I'm talking about: here's the fancy_memory_resource that backs my allocator...
template<class Ptr>
class fancy_memory_resource {
public:
Ptr allocate(size_t bytes, size_t align = alignof(max_align_t)) {
return do_allocate(bytes, align);
}
void deallocate(Ptr p, size_t bytes, size_t align = alignof(max_align_t)) {
return do_deallocate(p, bytes, align);
}
bool is_equal(const fancy_memory_resource& rhs) const noexcept {
return do_is_equal(rhs);
}
virtual ~fancy_memory_resource() = default;
private:
virtual Ptr do_allocate(size_t bytes, size_t align) = 0;
virtual void do_deallocate(Ptr p, size_t bytes, size_t align) = 0;
virtual bool do_is_equal(const fancy_memory_resource& rhs) const noexcept = 0;
};
(Notice that std::pmr::memory_resource can be implemented as a typedef for fancy_memory_resource<void*>. This is intentional on my part.)
Meanwhile, the Ptr in question is a fancy pointer type named segmented_fancy_pointer<T> (not pictured) that inherits from the CRTP type fancy_ptr_base<T, segmented_fancy_pointer<T>>...
template<class T, class CRTP>
struct fancy_ptr_base {
constexpr T *ptr() const noexcept { return m_ptr; }
constexpr explicit operator T*() const noexcept { return ptr(); }
constexpr explicit operator bool() const noexcept { return ptr() != nullptr; }
constexpr bool operator==(CRTP b) const { return ptr() == b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator!=(CRTP b) const { return ptr() != b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator==(decltype(nullptr)) const { return ptr() == nullptr; }
constexpr bool operator!=(decltype(nullptr)) const { return ptr() != nullptr; }
constexpr bool operator<(CRTP b) const { return ptr() < b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator<=(CRTP b) const { return ptr() <= b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator>(CRTP b) const { return ptr() > b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator>=(CRTP b) const { return ptr() >= b.ptr(); }
constexpr T& operator*() const noexcept { return *ptr(); }
constexpr T* operator->() const noexcept { return ptr(); }
constexpr CRTP& operator+=(ptrdiff_t i) { m_ptr += i; return as_crtp(); }
constexpr CRTP& operator-=(ptrdiff_t i) { m_ptr -= i; return as_crtp(); }
constexpr CRTP& operator++() { ++m_ptr; return as_crtp(); }
constexpr CRTP& operator--() { --m_ptr; return as_crtp(); }
constexpr CRTP operator++(int) { auto r(as_crtp()); ++*this; return r; }
constexpr CRTP operator--(int) { auto r(as_crtp()); --*this; return r; }
constexpr CRTP operator+(ptrdiff_t i) const { auto r(as_crtp()); r += i; return r; }
constexpr CRTP operator-(ptrdiff_t i) const { auto r(as_crtp()); r -= i; return r; }
constexpr ptrdiff_t operator-(CRTP b) const { return ptr() - b.ptr(); }
protected:
T *m_ptr = nullptr;
private:
constexpr CRTP& as_crtp() { return *static_cast<CRTP*>(this); }
constexpr const CRTP& as_crtp() const { return *static_cast<const CRTP*>(this); }
};
template<class CRTP>
struct fancy_ptr_base<void, CRTP> {
constexpr void *ptr() const noexcept { return m_ptr; }
constexpr explicit operator void*() const noexcept { return ptr(); }
constexpr explicit operator bool() const noexcept { return ptr() != nullptr; }
constexpr bool operator==(CRTP b) const { return ptr() == b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator!=(CRTP b) const { return ptr() != b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator==(decltype(nullptr)) const { return ptr() == nullptr; }
constexpr bool operator!=(decltype(nullptr)) const { return ptr() != nullptr; }
constexpr bool operator<(CRTP b) const { return ptr() < b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator<=(CRTP b) const { return ptr() <= b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator>(CRTP b) const { return ptr() > b.ptr(); }
constexpr bool operator>=(CRTP b) const { return ptr() >= b.ptr(); }
protected:
void *m_ptr = nullptr;
};
Now for the real question. When I go to use my segmented_allocator<T> (not pictured) with libc++'s std::vector, it all works fine. When I try to use it with libstdc++'s std::vector, it fails:
In file included from /opt/wandbox/gcc-head/include/c++/8.0.0/bits/stl_algobase.h:67:0,
from /opt/wandbox/gcc-head/include/c++/8.0.0/vector:60,
from prog.cc:1984:
/opt/wandbox/gcc-head/include/c++/8.0.0/bits/stl_iterator.h: In instantiation of 'class __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<scratch::segmented_fancy_pointer<int>, std::vector<int, scratch::pmr::propagating_polymorphic_allocator<int, scratch::segmented_fancy_pointer<int> > > >':
/opt/wandbox/gcc-head/include/c++/8.0.0/bits/vector.tcc:105:25: required from 'std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::reference std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::emplace_back(_Args&& ...) [with _Args = {int}; _Tp = int; _Alloc = scratch::pmr::propagating_polymorphic_allocator<int, scratch::segmented_fancy_pointer<int> >; std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::reference = int&]'
/opt/wandbox/gcc-head/include/c++/8.0.0/bits/stl_vector.h:954:21: required from 'void std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::push_back(std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::value_type&&) [with _Tp = int; _Alloc = scratch::pmr::propagating_polymorphic_allocator<int, scratch::segmented_fancy_pointer<int> >; std::vector<_Tp, _Alloc>::value_type = int]'
prog.cc:1990:18: required from here
/opt/wandbox/gcc-head/include/c++/8.0.0/bits/stl_iterator.h:770:57: error: no type named 'iterator_category' in 'struct std::iterator_traits<scratch::segmented_fancy_pointer<int> >'
typedef typename __traits_type::iterator_category iterator_category;
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now, I can fix this by adding the "iterator traits" typedefs into fancy_ptr_base<T, CRTP>, like this:
using pointer = CRTP;
using reference = T&;
using value_type = std::remove_cv_t<T>;
using iterator_category = std::random_access_iterator_tag;
using difference_type = ptrdiff_t;
But should I have to? Is it required that every fancy pointer type be an iterator type as well? Or is libc++ doing the right thing and libstdc++'s vector just has a bug?
(I have already convinced myself that most iterators are not fancy pointers. This question is motivated by my sudden doubt that perhaps all fancy pointers are indeed iterators.)
Yes, you are required to implement all requirements of a Random Access Iterator. C++ Standard [allocator.requirements]/5:
An allocator type
Xshall....X::pointerandX::const_pointershall also satisfy the requirements for a random access iterator.
So in particular, your fancy pointer type needs the five member types required of every iterator.
You also seem to be missing fancy_memory_resource<Ptr>::value_type, several needed non-member functions, and a number of noexcept keywords. Please review the requirements for allocator types and their pointer types carefully.