@@ -822,26 +822,179 @@ using movable_cast_op_type
822822 typename std::add_rvalue_reference<intrinsic_t <T>>::type,
823823 typename std::add_lvalue_reference<intrinsic_t <T>>::type>>;
824824
825- // std::is_copy_constructible isn't quite enough: it lets std::vector<T> (and similar) through when
826- // T is non-copyable, but code containing such a copy constructor fails to actually compile.
827- template <typename T, typename SFINAE = void >
828- struct is_copy_constructible : std::is_copy_constructible<T> {};
825+ // Does the container have a mapped type and is it recursive?
826+ // Implemented by specializations below.
827+ template <typename Container, typename SFINAE = void >
828+ struct container_mapped_type_traits {
829+ static constexpr bool has_mapped_type = false ;
830+ static constexpr bool has_recursive_mapped_type = false ;
831+ };
832+
833+ template <typename Container>
834+ struct container_mapped_type_traits <
835+ Container,
836+ typename std::enable_if<
837+ std::is_same<typename Container::mapped_type, Container>::value>::type> {
838+ static constexpr bool has_mapped_type = true ;
839+ static constexpr bool has_recursive_mapped_type = true ;
840+ };
841+
842+ template <typename Container>
843+ struct container_mapped_type_traits <
844+ Container,
845+ typename std::enable_if<
846+ negation<std::is_same<typename Container::mapped_type, Container>>::value>::type> {
847+ static constexpr bool has_mapped_type = true ;
848+ static constexpr bool has_recursive_mapped_type = false ;
849+ };
850+
851+ // Does the container have a value type and is it recursive?
852+ // Implemented by specializations below.
853+ template <typename Container, typename SFINAE = void >
854+ struct container_value_type_traits : std::false_type {
855+ static constexpr bool has_value_type = false ;
856+ static constexpr bool has_recursive_value_type = false ;
857+ };
858+
859+ template <typename Container>
860+ struct container_value_type_traits <
861+ Container,
862+ typename std::enable_if<
863+ std::is_same<typename Container::value_type, Container>::value>::type> {
864+ static constexpr bool has_value_type = true ;
865+ static constexpr bool has_recursive_value_type = true ;
866+ };
867+
868+ template <typename Container>
869+ struct container_value_type_traits <
870+ Container,
871+ typename std::enable_if<
872+ negation<std::is_same<typename Container::value_type, Container>>::value>::type> {
873+ static constexpr bool has_value_type = true ;
874+ static constexpr bool has_recursive_value_type = false ;
875+ };
876+
877+ /*
878+ * Tag to be used for representing the bottom of recursively defined types.
879+ * Define this tag so we don't have to use void.
880+ */
881+ struct recursive_bottom {};
882+
883+ /*
884+ * Implementation detail of `recursive_container_traits` below.
885+ * `T` is the `value_type` of the container, which might need to be modified to
886+ * avoid recursive types and const types.
887+ */
888+ template <typename T, bool is_this_a_map>
889+ struct impl_type_to_check_recursively {
890+ /*
891+ * If the container is recursive, then no further recursion should be done.
892+ */
893+ using if_recursive = recursive_bottom;
894+ /*
895+ * Otherwise yield `T` unchanged.
896+ */
897+ using if_not_recursive = T;
898+ };
899+
900+ /*
901+ * For pairs - only as value type of a map -, the first type should remove the `const`.
902+ * Also, if the map is recursive, then the recursive checking should consider
903+ * the first type only.
904+ */
905+ template <typename A, typename B>
906+ struct impl_type_to_check_recursively <std::pair<A, B>, /* is_this_a_map = */ true > {
907+ using if_recursive = typename std::remove_const<A>::type;
908+ using if_not_recursive = std::pair<typename std::remove_const<A>::type, B>;
909+ };
829910
830- template <typename T, typename SFINAE = void >
831- struct is_move_constructible : std::is_move_constructible<T> {};
911+ /*
912+ * Implementation of `recursive_container_traits` below.
913+ */
914+ template <typename Container, typename SFINAE = void >
915+ struct impl_recursive_container_traits {
916+ using type_to_check_recursively = recursive_bottom;
917+ };
832918
833- // Specialization for types that appear to be copy constructible but also look like stl containers
834- // (we specifically check for: has `value_type` and `reference` with `reference = value_type&`): if
835- // so, copy constructability depends on whether the value_type is copy constructible.
836919template <typename Container>
837- struct is_copy_constructible <
920+ struct impl_recursive_container_traits <
838921 Container,
839- enable_if_t <
840- all_of<std::is_copy_constructible<Container>,
841- std::is_same<typename Container::value_type &, typename Container::reference>,
842- // Avoid infinite recursion
843- negation<std::is_same<Container, typename Container::value_type>>>::value>>
844- : is_copy_constructible<typename Container::value_type> {};
922+ typename std::enable_if<container_value_type_traits<Container>::has_value_type>::type> {
923+ static constexpr bool is_recursive
924+ = container_mapped_type_traits<Container>::has_recursive_mapped_type
925+ || container_value_type_traits<Container>::has_recursive_value_type;
926+ /*
927+ * This member dictates which type Pybind11 should check recursively in traits
928+ * such as `is_move_constructible`, `is_copy_constructible`, `is_move_assignable`, ...
929+ * Direct access to `value_type` should be avoided:
930+ * 1. `value_type` might recursively contain the type again
931+ * 2. `value_type` of STL map types is `std::pair<A const, B>`, the `const`
932+ * should be removed.
933+ *
934+ */
935+ using type_to_check_recursively = typename std::conditional<
936+ is_recursive,
937+ typename impl_type_to_check_recursively<
938+ typename Container::value_type,
939+ container_mapped_type_traits<Container>::has_mapped_type>::if_recursive,
940+ typename impl_type_to_check_recursively<
941+ typename Container::value_type,
942+ container_mapped_type_traits<Container>::has_mapped_type>::if_not_recursive>::type;
943+ };
944+
945+ /*
946+ * This trait defines the `type_to_check_recursively` which is needed to properly
947+ * handle recursively defined traits such as `is_move_constructible` without going
948+ * into an infinite recursion.
949+ * Should be used instead of directly accessing the `value_type`.
950+ * It cancels the recursion by returning the `recursive_bottom` tag.
951+ *
952+ * The default definition of `type_to_check_recursively` is as follows:
953+ *
954+ * 1. By default, it is `recursive_bottom`, so that the recursion is canceled.
955+ * 2. If the type is non-recursive and defines a `value_type`, then the `value_type` is used.
956+ * If the `value_type` is a pair and a `mapped_type` is defined,
957+ * then the `const` is removed from the first type.
958+ * 3. If the type is recursive and `value_type` is not a pair, then `recursive_bottom` is returned.
959+ * 4. If the type is recursive and `value_type` is a pair and a `mapped_type` is defined,
960+ * then `const` is removed from the first type and the first type is returned.
961+ *
962+ * This behavior can be extended by the user as seen in test_stl_binders.cpp.
963+ *
964+ * This struct is exactly the same as impl_recursive_container_traits.
965+ * The duplication achieves that user-defined specializations don't compete
966+ * with internal specializations, but take precedence.
967+ */
968+ template <typename Container, typename SFINAE = void >
969+ struct recursive_container_traits : impl_recursive_container_traits<Container> {};
970+
971+ template <typename T>
972+ struct is_move_constructible
973+ : all_of<std::is_move_constructible<T>,
974+ is_move_constructible<
975+ typename recursive_container_traits<T>::type_to_check_recursively>> {};
976+
977+ template <>
978+ struct is_move_constructible <recursive_bottom> : std::true_type {};
979+
980+ // Likewise for std::pair
981+ // (after C++17 it is mandatory that the move constructor not exist when the two types aren't
982+ // themselves move constructible, but this can not be relied upon when T1 or T2 are themselves
983+ // containers).
984+ template <typename T1, typename T2>
985+ struct is_move_constructible <std::pair<T1, T2>>
986+ : all_of<is_move_constructible<T1>, is_move_constructible<T2>> {};
987+
988+ // std::is_copy_constructible isn't quite enough: it lets std::vector<T> (and similar) through when
989+ // T is non-copyable, but code containing such a copy constructor fails to actually compile.
990+ template <typename T>
991+ struct is_copy_constructible
992+ : all_of<std::is_copy_constructible<T>,
993+ is_copy_constructible<
994+ typename recursive_container_traits<T>::type_to_check_recursively>> {};
995+
996+ template <>
997+ struct is_copy_constructible <recursive_bottom> : std::true_type {};
845998
846999// Likewise for std::pair
8471000// (after C++17 it is mandatory that the copy constructor not exist when the two types aren't
@@ -852,14 +1005,16 @@ struct is_copy_constructible<std::pair<T1, T2>>
8521005 : all_of<is_copy_constructible<T1>, is_copy_constructible<T2>> {};
8531006
8541007// The same problems arise with std::is_copy_assignable, so we use the same workaround.
855- template <typename T, typename SFINAE = void >
856- struct is_copy_assignable : std::is_copy_assignable<T> {};
857- template <typename Container>
858- struct is_copy_assignable <Container,
859- enable_if_t <all_of<std::is_copy_assignable<Container>,
860- std::is_same<typename Container::value_type &,
861- typename Container::reference>>::value>>
862- : is_copy_assignable<typename Container::value_type> {};
1008+ template <typename T>
1009+ struct is_copy_assignable
1010+ : all_of<
1011+ std::is_copy_assignable<T>,
1012+ is_copy_assignable<typename recursive_container_traits<T>::type_to_check_recursively>> {
1013+ };
1014+
1015+ template <>
1016+ struct is_copy_assignable <recursive_bottom> : std::true_type {};
1017+
8631018template <typename T1, typename T2>
8641019struct is_copy_assignable <std::pair<T1, T2>>
8651020 : all_of<is_copy_assignable<T1>, is_copy_assignable<T2>> {};
0 commit comments