Memory usage is quite critical in my application. Therefore I have specific asserts that check for the memory size at compile time and give a static_assert if the size is different from what we considered correct before.
I have defined a macro like this:
#define CHECKMEM(mytype, size) static_assert((sizeof(objectType) == size)), "Size incorrect for " #mytype "!");
This macro makes it very easy to write this:
CHECKMEM(Book,144);
CHECKMEM(Library,80);
The problem is that when this static_assert goes off, it might be quite difficult to find out what the new size should be (e.g. by using the hidden compiler option "/d1 reportAllClassLayout"). It would be much handier if I could include the actual size, so instead of:
Size incorrect for Book!
It would show
Size incorrect for Book! (expected 144, size is 152)
I tried writing something like this:
#define CHECKMEM(mytype, size) static_assert((sizeof(objectType) == size)), "Size incorrect for " #mytype "! (expected" #size ", size is " #sizeof(mytype) ")");
But you can't use the stringize (#) operator on a function call.
I also tried adding the double-stringize trick, like this:
#define STR1(x) #x
#define STR2(x) STR1(x)
#define CHECKMEM(mytype, size) static_assert((sizeof(objectType) == size)), "Size incorrect for " #mytype "! (expected" #size ", size is " STR2(sizeof(mytype)) ")");
But instead of printing size is 152
it prints size is sizeof(Book)
.
Is there a way to stringify the result of sizeof in a static_assert?
I'd use dispatching on a function template to do the checking:
#include <cstddef>
template <typename ToCheck, std::size_t ExpectedSize, std::size_t RealSize = sizeof(ToCheck)>
void check_size() {
static_assert(ExpectedSize == RealSize, "Size is off!");
}
struct foo
{
char bla[16];
};
int main()
{
check_size<foo, 8>();
return 0;
}
Results in:
In instantiation of ‘void check_size() [with ToCheck = foo; long unsigned int ExpectedSize = 8ul; long unsigned int RealSize = 16ul]’:
bla.cpp:15:22: required from here
bla.cpp:5:1: error: static assertion failed: Size is off!
The debugging information is in the template parameters of the back-trace.
If this is truly better, you will have to decide and it also depends on the compiler. It also enables you to hide the expected size with a template map, to sum up to a max size and other fancy things.