public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: leick.robinson@motorola.com
To: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: c++/7704: template match difference on function pointer template args
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 10:26:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020823162932.29173.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw)


>Number:         7704
>Category:       c++
>Synopsis:       template match difference on function pointer template args
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    unassigned
>State:          open
>Class:          wrong-code
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Fri Aug 23 09:36:00 PDT 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     leick.robinson@motorola.com
>Release:        gcc 2.95.2 or gcc 3.0.4
>Organization:
>Environment:
SUNW,Ultra-60
SunOS 5.8
>Description:
It's not clear whether the bug is in gcc 2.95.2 or 3.0.4.

There's a difference in the way these releases match 
template arguments to the corresponding (partial) template 
specialization.

In the code below, gcc 2.95.2 matches the function pointer
argument ( A<void (*) ()> ) to the last specialization
( class A<retval (*) (...)> ).

On the other hand, gcc 3.0.4 matches it to the specialization
for pointers ( A<U*> ).

Which is the correct behavior?
>How-To-Repeat:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

template <class T>
class A {
public:
   static void foo()
   {
      cout << "Default A" << endl;
   }
};

// Template specialization for a pointer
template <class U>
class A<U*> {
public:
   static void foo()
   {
      cout << "A for pointers" << endl;
   }
};

// Template specialization for function pointers (?)
template <class retval>
class A<retval (*) (...)> {
public:
   static void foo()
   {
      cout << "A for function pointers" << endl;
   };
};

int main()
{
   A<int>::foo();

   A<int*>::foo();

   A<void (*) ()>::foo();
}

// g++ 2.95.2 produces:
//
// Default A
// A for pointers
// A for function pointers
//
// g++ 3.0.4 produces:
//
// Default A
// A for pointers
// A for pointers
//
>Fix:

>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted:


             reply	other threads:[~2002-08-23 16:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-08-23 10:26 leick.robinson [this message]
2002-09-13 15:03 nathan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20020823162932.29173.qmail@sources.redhat.com \
    --to=leick.robinson@motorola.com \
    --cc=gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).