std::function construction vs assignment
Barry Revzin

Created on 2016-09-14.00:00:00, last changed 2019-07-26.13:42:16.


Date: 2019-07-27.14:06:54

Proposed resolution:

This wording is relative to N4820.

  1. Edit [func.wrap.func], class template function synopsis, as indicated:

    namespace std {
      template<class> class function; // not defined
      template<class R, class... ArgTypes> {
        using result_type = R;
        // [func.wrap.func.con], construct/copy/destroy
        function() noexcept;
        function(nullptr_t) noexcept;
        function(const function&);
        function(function&&) noexcept;
        template<class F> function(F&&);
  2. Edit [func.wrap.func.con] p7-11 as indicated:

    template<class F> function(F&& f);

    -7- Requires: F shall be Cpp17CopyConstructibleLet FD be decay_t<F>.

    -8- Remarks: This constructor template shall not participate in overload resolution unless F Constraints:

    1. (8.1) — is_same_v<FD, function> is false; and

    2. (8.2) — FD is Lvalue-Callable ([func.wrap.func]) for argument types ArgTypes... and return type R.

    -?- Expects: FD meets the Cpp17CopyConstructible requirements.

    -9- Ensures: !*this if any of the following hold:

    1. (9.1) — f is a null function pointer value.

    2. (9.2) — f is a null member pointer value.

    3. (9.3) — F is an instance remove_cvref_t<F> is a specialization of the function class template, and !f is true.

    -10- Otherwise, *this targets a copy of fan object of type FD direct-non-list-initialized with std::move(f) std::forward<F>(f). [Note: Implementations should avoid the use of dynamically allocated memory for small callable objects, for example, where f is refers to an object holding only a pointer or reference to an object and a member function pointer. — end note]

    -11- Throws: Shall Does not throw exceptions when f FD is a function pointer type or a specialization of reference_wrapper<T> for some T. Otherwise, may throw bad_alloc or any exception thrown by F’s copy or move constructor the initialization of the target object.

Date: 2019-07-26.00:00:00

[ 2019-07-26 Tim provides PR. ]

Date: 2016-10-08.04:58:13

I think there's a minor defect in the std::function interface. The constructor template is:

template <class F> function(F f);

while the assignment operator template is

template <class F> function& operator=(F&& f);

The latter came about as a result of LWG 1288, but that one was dealing with a specific issue that wouldn't have affected the constructor. I think the constructor should also take f by forwarding reference, this saves a move in the lvalue/xvalue cases and is also just generally more consistent. Should just make sure that it's stored as std::decay_t<F> instead of F.

Is there any reason to favor a by-value constructor over a forwarding-reference constructor?

Date User Action Args
2019-07-26 13:42:16adminsetmessages: + msg10514
2016-10-03 15:43:16adminsetmessages: + msg8528
2016-09-14 00:00:00admincreate