Enumerate over an enum in C++

Question

In C++, Is it possible to enumerate over an enum (either runtime or compile time (preferred)) and call functions/generate code for each iteration?

Sample use case:

enum abc
{    
    start
    a,
    b,
    c,
    end
}    
for each (__enum__member__ in abc)
{    
    function_call(__enum__member__);    
}

---

Plausible duplicates:

• C++: Iterate through an enum
• Enum in C++ like Enum in Ada?

Answer 1

Neither is possible without a little manual labour. A lot of the work can be done by macros, if you’re willing to delve into that area.

Answer 2

No

However, you could define your own class that implements enum-like features with iterations. You may recall a trick from the pre 1.5 Java days, called the "type safe enum design pattern". You could do the C++ equivalent.

Answer 3

Expanding on what Konrad says, one possible idiom in the case of "generate code for each iteration" is to use an included file to represent the enumeration:

mystuff.h:

#ifndef LAST_ENUM_ELEMENT
#define LAST_ENUM_ELEMENT(ARG) ENUM_ELEMENT(ARG)
#endif

ENUM_ELEMENT(foo)
ENUM_ELEMENT(bar)
LAST_ENUM_ELEMENT(baz)

// not essential, but most likely every "caller" should do it anyway...
#undef LAST_ENUM_ELEMENT
#undef ENUM_ELEMENT

enum.h:

// include guard goes here (but mystuff.h doesn't have one)

enum element {
    #define ENUM_ELEMENT(ARG) ARG,
    #define LAST_ENUM_ELEMENT(ARG) ARG
    #include "mystuff.h"
}

main.cpp:

#include "enum.h"
#define ENUM_ELEMENT(ARG) void do_##ARG();
#include "mystuff.h"

element value = getValue();
switch(value) {
    #define ENUM_ELEMENT(ARG) case ARG: do_##ARG(); break;
    #include "mystuff.h"
    default: std::terminate();
}

So, to add a new element "qux", you add it to mystuff.h and write the do_qux function. You don't have to touch the dispatch code.

Of course if the values in your enum need to be specific non-consecutive integers, then you end up maintaining the enum definition and the ENUM_ELEMENT(foo)... list separately, which is messy.

Answer 4

This seems hacky to me, but may suit your purposes:

enum Blah {
  FOO,
  BAR,
  NUM_BLAHS
};

// later on
for (int i = 0; i < NUM_BLAHS; ++i) {
  switch (i) {
  case FOO:
    // foo stuff
    break;
  case BAR:
    // bar stuff
    break;
  default:
    // you're missing a case statement
  }
}

If you need a special start value, you can make that a constant and set it in your enum. I didn't check if this compiles, but it should be close to being there :-). Hope this helps.

I think this approach might be a good balance for your use case. Use it if you don't need to do this for a bunch of different enumerated types and you don't want to deal with preprocessor stuff. Just make sure you comment and probably add a TODO to change it at a later date to something better :-).

Answer 5

C++ does not have a specific feature that allows iteration of enum values. Despite that, the need sometimes arises for such a feature. A common workaround is to add values that mark the beginning and the ending. For example:

enum Color
{
    Color_Begin,
    Color_Red = Color_Begin,
    Color_Orange,
    Color_Yellow,
    Color_Green,
    Color_Blue,
    Color_Indigo,
    Color_Violet,
    Color_End
};

void foo(Color c)
{
}


void iterateColors()
{
    for (size_t colorIdx = Color_Begin; colorIdx != Color_End; ++colorIdx)
    {
        foo(static_cast<Color>(colorIdx));
    }
}

Hope this helps.

Answer 6

To add to @StackedCrooked answer, you can overload operator++, operator-- and operator* and have iterator like functionality.

enum Color {
    Color_Begin,
    Color_Red = Color_Begin,
    Color_Orange,
    Color_Yellow,
    Color_Green,
    Color_Blue,
    Color_Indigo,
    Color_Violet,
    Color_End
};

namespace std {
template<>
struct iterator_traits<Color>  {
  typedef Color  value_type;
  typedef int    difference_type;
  typedef Color *pointer;
  typedef Color &reference;
  typedef std::bidirectional_iterator_tag
    iterator_category;
};
}

Color &operator++(Color &c) {
  assert(c != Color_End);
  c = static_cast<Color>(c + 1);
  return c;
}

Color operator++(Color &c, int) {
  assert(c != Color_End); 
  ++c;
  return static_cast<Color>(c - 1);
}

Color &operator--(Color &c) {
  assert(c != Color_Begin);
  return c = static_cast<Color>(c - 1);
}

Color operator--(Color &c, int) {
  assert(c != Color_Begin); 
  --c;
  return static_cast<Color>(c + 1);
}

Color operator*(Color c) {
  assert(c != Color_End);
  return c;
}

Let's test with some <algorithm> template

void print(Color c) {
  std::cout << c << std::endl;
}

int main() {
  std::for_each(Color_Begin, Color_End, &print);
}

Now, Color is a constant bidirectional iterator. Here is a reusable class i coded while doing it manually above. I noticed it could work for many more enums, so repeating the same code all over again is quite tedious

// Code for testing enum_iterator
// --------------------------------

namespace color_test {
enum Color {
  Color_Begin,
  Color_Red = Color_Begin,
  Color_Orange,
  Color_Yellow,
  Color_Green,
  Color_Blue,
  Color_Indigo,
  Color_Violet,
  Color_End
};

Color begin(enum_identity<Color>) {
  return Color_Begin;
}

Color end(enum_identity<Color>) {
  return Color_End;
}
}

void print(color_test::Color c) {
  std::cout << c << std::endl;
}

int main() {
  enum_iterator<color_test::Color> b = color_test::Color_Begin, e;
  while(b != e)
    print(*b++);
}

Implementation follows.

template<typename T>
struct enum_identity { 
  typedef T type; 
};

namespace details {
void begin();
void end();
}

template<typename Enum>
struct enum_iterator 
  : std::iterator<std::bidirectional_iterator_tag, 
                  Enum> {
  enum_iterator():c(end()) { }

  enum_iterator(Enum c):c(c) { 
    assert(c >= begin() && c <= end());
  }

  enum_iterator &operator=(Enum c) {
    assert(c >= begin() && c <= end());
    this->c = c; 
    return *this;
  }

  static Enum begin() {
    using details::begin; // re-enable ADL
    return begin(enum_identity<Enum>());
  }

  static Enum end() {
    using details::end; // re-enable ADL
    return end(enum_identity<Enum>());
  }

  enum_iterator &operator++() {
    assert(c != end() && "incrementing past end?");
    c = static_cast<Enum>(c + 1);
    return *this;
  }

  enum_iterator operator++(int) {
    assert(c != end() && "incrementing past end?");
    enum_iterator cpy(*this);
    ++*this;
    return cpy;
  }

  enum_iterator &operator--() {
    assert(c != begin() && "decrementing beyond begin?");
    c = static_cast<Enum>(c - 1);
    return *this;
  }

  enum_iterator operator--(int) {
    assert(c != begin() && "decrementing beyond begin?");
    enum_iterator cpy(*this);
    --*this;
    return cpy;
  }

  Enum operator*() {
    assert(c != end() && "cannot dereference end iterator");
    return c;
  }

  Enum get_enum() const {
    return c;
  }

private:
  Enum c;
};

template<typename Enum>
bool operator==(enum_iterator<Enum> e1, enum_iterator<Enum> e2) {
  return e1.get_enum() == e2.get_enum();
}

template<typename Enum>
bool operator!=(enum_iterator<Enum> e1, enum_iterator<Enum> e2) {
  return !(e1 == e2);
}

Answer 7

You can perform some of the proposed runtime techniques statically with TMP.

#include <iostream>

enum abc
{
    a,
    b,
    c,
    end
};

void function_call(abc val)
{
    std::cout << val << std::endl;
}

template<abc val>
struct iterator_t
{
    static void run()
    {
        function_call(val);

        iterator_t<static_cast<abc>(val + 1)>::run();
    }
};

template<>
struct iterator_t<end>
{
    static void run()
    {
    }
};

int main()
{
    iterator_t<a>::run();

    return 0;
}

The output from this program is:

0
1
2

See Ch 1 of Abrahams, Gurtovoy "C++ Template Metaprogramming" for a good treatment of this technique. The advantage to doing it this way over the proposed runtime techniques is that, when you optimize this code, it can inline the statics and is roughly equivalent to:

function_call(a);
function_call(b);
function_call(c);

Inline function_call for even more help from the compiler.

The same criticisms of other enumeration iteration techniques apply here. This technique only works if your enumeration increments continuously from a through end by ones.