7

I have some code to interface Python to C++ which works fine but every time I look at it I think there must be a better way to do it. On the C++ side there is a 'variant' type that can deal with a fixed range of basic types - int, real, string, vector of variants, etc. I have some code using the Python API to convert from the equivalent Python types. It looks something like this:

variant makeVariant(PyObject* value)
{  
  if (PyString_Check(value)) {
    return PyString_AsString(value);
  }
  else if (value == Py_None) {
    return variant();
  }
  else if (PyBool_Check(value)) {
    return value == Py_True;
  }
  else if (PyInt_Check(value)) {
    return PyInt_AsLong(value);
  }
  else if (PyFloat_Check(value)) {
    return PyFloat_AsDouble(value);
  }
  // ... etc

The problem is the chained if-else ifs. It seems to be calling out for a switch statement, or a table or map of creation functions which is keyed by a type identifier. In other words I want to be able to write something like:

  return createFunMap[typeID(value)](value);

Based on a skim of the API docs it wasn't obvious what the best way is to get the 'typeID' here directly. I see I can do something like this:

  PyTypeObject* type = value->ob_type;

This apparently gets me quickly to the type information but what is the cleanest way to use that to relate to the limited set of types I am interested in?

1 Answer 1

3

In a way, I think you've answered your own question.

Somewhere, you're going to have to select functionality based on data. The way to do this in C is to use function pointers.

Create a map of object_type->function mappers... where each function has a clearly-defined interface.

variant PyBoolToVariant(PyObject *value) {
    return value == Py_True;
}

Map<PyTypeObject*,variant* (PyObject*)> function_map;

function_map.add(PyBool, PyBoolToVariant);

Now your makeVariant can look like this.

variant makeVariant(PyObject *value) {
    return (*function_map.get(value->ob_type))(value);
}

The hard part is going to be getting the syntax right for the Map object. Also, I'm assuming there is a Map object you can use that takes type parameters (<PyTypeObject*, variant*(PyObject*)).

I probably have not quite gotten the syntax correct for the second type of the Map. It should be a pointer to a function which takes one pointer and returns a pointer to a variant.

I hope this is helpful.

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

1 Comment

Thanks. The function_map.add(PyBool, ... part of your answer was enough of a hint for me to look in the right place in the API document. I think this needs to be PyBool_Type rather than PyBool. The essence of my question was really what are the values of PyTypeObject that I needed to use as my map key and this answers it.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.