Loop over whole array starting from any index

Question

I recently had to repeatedly iterate over an array but increment the index to start from each time. Since this is quite cumbersome in comparison to a normal for loop I made a small template function that does this for me:

#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
template<typename TSize, typename TFunc>
void for_start(const TSize start, const TSize size, TFunc&& fn)
{
 for(TSize c{}, i{c + start}; c < size; ++c, ++i)
 {
 if(i >= size)
 i = 0;
 fn(i);
 }
}
template<typename TRAIter, typename TFunc>
void for_start(TRAIter start, TRAIter begin, TRAIter end, TFunc&& fn)
{
 for(TRAIter c{begin}, i{c + std::distance(begin, start)}; c != end; ++i, ++c)
 {
 if(i == end)
 i = begin;
 fn(i);
 }
}
// usage
int main()
{
 const unsigned ARR_SIZE{10};
 int arr[ARR_SIZE]{
 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
 };
 for_start(5u, ARR_SIZE, [arr](unsigned i)
 {
 std::cout << arr[i] << ' ';
 });
 std::cout << '\n';
 for_start(std::begin(arr) + 5, std::begin(arr), std::end(arr), [](const int* i)
 {
 std::cout << *i << ' ';
 });
}
// prints:
// 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 
// 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 

I'd like to get some feedback on things like usability (function name, order of parameters) and reuseability. Note that I'd like to use this function with signed & unsigned integers.

• Toby Speight: If you weren't constrained to C++11, I'd have suggested you look into std::range, which has been voted in to C++20.
• Incomputable: @TobySpeight, this is not my birthday, but thank you for the gift. Though googling for it didn't yield anything useful yet.

Answer 1

• There is no reason to initialize i as {c + std::distance(begin, start)}. Upon such initialization you are guaranteed that i == start. A much simpler i{start} suffices.

• Testing for i == size, or i == end inside the loop, as well as tracking two iterators, feels wasteful. Consider splitting the loop into two, e.g:

   for (i = start; i != end; ++i) {
   fn(i);
   }
   for (i = begin; i != start; ++i) {
   fn(i);
   }
  

• I am not sure that for_start is a good name. I am also not sure what name would be good. iterate_rotated perhaps?

• HenrikS: The idea to use 2 seperate loops didn't even cross my mind... Thank you!