May I change the held type in a std::variant from within a call to std::visit












20















Does the following code invoke undefined behaviour?



std::variant<A,B> v = ...;

std::visit([&v](auto& e){
if constexpr (std::is_same_v<std::remove_reference_t<decltype(e)>,A>)
e.some_modifying_operation_on_A();
else {
int i = e.some_accessor_of_B();
v = some_function_returning_A(i);
}
}, v);


In particular, when the variant does not contain an A,
this code re-assigns an A while still holding a reference to the previously held object of type B.
However, because the reference is not used anymore after the assignment,
I feel the code is fine.
However, would a standard-library be free to implement std::visit
in a way such that the above is undefined behaviour?










share|improve this question




















  • 5





    Do you want quotes from the standard to back up the answer(s) you get?

    – NathanOliver
    Mar 15 at 17:08






  • 1





    From looking at [variant.visit], I'm 99% sure this code is compliant and guaranteed not to have UB, since std::visit(vis, variant) should be equivalent to vis(get</* active member */>(variant)), but I'm not confident enough in reading the standard to be certain

    – Justin
    Mar 15 at 17:27













  • @NathanOliver: I don't need actual quotes from the standard, as long as the experts here can agree on the answer:-).

    – burnpanck
    Mar 15 at 17:31
















20















Does the following code invoke undefined behaviour?



std::variant<A,B> v = ...;

std::visit([&v](auto& e){
if constexpr (std::is_same_v<std::remove_reference_t<decltype(e)>,A>)
e.some_modifying_operation_on_A();
else {
int i = e.some_accessor_of_B();
v = some_function_returning_A(i);
}
}, v);


In particular, when the variant does not contain an A,
this code re-assigns an A while still holding a reference to the previously held object of type B.
However, because the reference is not used anymore after the assignment,
I feel the code is fine.
However, would a standard-library be free to implement std::visit
in a way such that the above is undefined behaviour?










share|improve this question




















  • 5





    Do you want quotes from the standard to back up the answer(s) you get?

    – NathanOliver
    Mar 15 at 17:08






  • 1





    From looking at [variant.visit], I'm 99% sure this code is compliant and guaranteed not to have UB, since std::visit(vis, variant) should be equivalent to vis(get</* active member */>(variant)), but I'm not confident enough in reading the standard to be certain

    – Justin
    Mar 15 at 17:27













  • @NathanOliver: I don't need actual quotes from the standard, as long as the experts here can agree on the answer:-).

    – burnpanck
    Mar 15 at 17:31














20












20








20


2






Does the following code invoke undefined behaviour?



std::variant<A,B> v = ...;

std::visit([&v](auto& e){
if constexpr (std::is_same_v<std::remove_reference_t<decltype(e)>,A>)
e.some_modifying_operation_on_A();
else {
int i = e.some_accessor_of_B();
v = some_function_returning_A(i);
}
}, v);


In particular, when the variant does not contain an A,
this code re-assigns an A while still holding a reference to the previously held object of type B.
However, because the reference is not used anymore after the assignment,
I feel the code is fine.
However, would a standard-library be free to implement std::visit
in a way such that the above is undefined behaviour?










share|improve this question
















Does the following code invoke undefined behaviour?



std::variant<A,B> v = ...;

std::visit([&v](auto& e){
if constexpr (std::is_same_v<std::remove_reference_t<decltype(e)>,A>)
e.some_modifying_operation_on_A();
else {
int i = e.some_accessor_of_B();
v = some_function_returning_A(i);
}
}, v);


In particular, when the variant does not contain an A,
this code re-assigns an A while still holding a reference to the previously held object of type B.
However, because the reference is not used anymore after the assignment,
I feel the code is fine.
However, would a standard-library be free to implement std::visit
in a way such that the above is undefined behaviour?







c++ c++17 std-variant






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 15 at 17:23









Barry

185k21326601




185k21326601










asked Mar 15 at 17:05









burnpanckburnpanck

1,151622




1,151622








  • 5





    Do you want quotes from the standard to back up the answer(s) you get?

    – NathanOliver
    Mar 15 at 17:08






  • 1





    From looking at [variant.visit], I'm 99% sure this code is compliant and guaranteed not to have UB, since std::visit(vis, variant) should be equivalent to vis(get</* active member */>(variant)), but I'm not confident enough in reading the standard to be certain

    – Justin
    Mar 15 at 17:27













  • @NathanOliver: I don't need actual quotes from the standard, as long as the experts here can agree on the answer:-).

    – burnpanck
    Mar 15 at 17:31














  • 5





    Do you want quotes from the standard to back up the answer(s) you get?

    – NathanOliver
    Mar 15 at 17:08






  • 1





    From looking at [variant.visit], I'm 99% sure this code is compliant and guaranteed not to have UB, since std::visit(vis, variant) should be equivalent to vis(get</* active member */>(variant)), but I'm not confident enough in reading the standard to be certain

    – Justin
    Mar 15 at 17:27













  • @NathanOliver: I don't need actual quotes from the standard, as long as the experts here can agree on the answer:-).

    – burnpanck
    Mar 15 at 17:31








5




5





Do you want quotes from the standard to back up the answer(s) you get?

– NathanOliver
Mar 15 at 17:08





Do you want quotes from the standard to back up the answer(s) you get?

– NathanOliver
Mar 15 at 17:08




1




1





From looking at [variant.visit], I'm 99% sure this code is compliant and guaranteed not to have UB, since std::visit(vis, variant) should be equivalent to vis(get</* active member */>(variant)), but I'm not confident enough in reading the standard to be certain

– Justin
Mar 15 at 17:27







From looking at [variant.visit], I'm 99% sure this code is compliant and guaranteed not to have UB, since std::visit(vis, variant) should be equivalent to vis(get</* active member */>(variant)), but I'm not confident enough in reading the standard to be certain

– Justin
Mar 15 at 17:27















@NathanOliver: I don't need actual quotes from the standard, as long as the experts here can agree on the answer:-).

– burnpanck
Mar 15 at 17:31





@NathanOliver: I don't need actual quotes from the standard, as long as the experts here can agree on the answer:-).

– burnpanck
Mar 15 at 17:31












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















14














The code is fine.



There is no requirement in the specification of std::visit that the visitor not change the alternative of any of the variants it is invoked on. The only requirement is:




Requires: For each valid pack m, e(m) shall be a valid expression. All such expressions shall be of the same type and value category; otherwise, the program is ill-formed.




Your visitor is a valid expression for each m and always returns void, so it satisfies the requirements and has well-defined behavior.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    });
    });
    }, "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55187548%2fmay-i-change-the-held-type-in-a-stdvariant-from-within-a-call-to-stdvisit%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    14














    The code is fine.



    There is no requirement in the specification of std::visit that the visitor not change the alternative of any of the variants it is invoked on. The only requirement is:




    Requires: For each valid pack m, e(m) shall be a valid expression. All such expressions shall be of the same type and value category; otherwise, the program is ill-formed.




    Your visitor is a valid expression for each m and always returns void, so it satisfies the requirements and has well-defined behavior.






    share|improve this answer




























      14














      The code is fine.



      There is no requirement in the specification of std::visit that the visitor not change the alternative of any of the variants it is invoked on. The only requirement is:




      Requires: For each valid pack m, e(m) shall be a valid expression. All such expressions shall be of the same type and value category; otherwise, the program is ill-formed.




      Your visitor is a valid expression for each m and always returns void, so it satisfies the requirements and has well-defined behavior.






      share|improve this answer


























        14












        14








        14







        The code is fine.



        There is no requirement in the specification of std::visit that the visitor not change the alternative of any of the variants it is invoked on. The only requirement is:




        Requires: For each valid pack m, e(m) shall be a valid expression. All such expressions shall be of the same type and value category; otherwise, the program is ill-formed.




        Your visitor is a valid expression for each m and always returns void, so it satisfies the requirements and has well-defined behavior.






        share|improve this answer













        The code is fine.



        There is no requirement in the specification of std::visit that the visitor not change the alternative of any of the variants it is invoked on. The only requirement is:




        Requires: For each valid pack m, e(m) shall be a valid expression. All such expressions shall be of the same type and value category; otherwise, the program is ill-formed.




        Your visitor is a valid expression for each m and always returns void, so it satisfies the requirements and has well-defined behavior.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Mar 15 at 17:28









        BarryBarry

        185k21326601




        185k21326601
































            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55187548%2fmay-i-change-the-held-type-in-a-stdvariant-from-within-a-call-to-stdvisit%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            How did Captain America manage to do this?

            迪纳利

            南乌拉尔铁路局