public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: lerdsuwa@gcc.gnu.org To: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, nbecker@fred.net, nobody@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: c++/8640: [2003-01-22] template specialization bug #2 (gcc3.2) Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2003 12:45:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20030316124510.29878.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) Synopsis: [2003-01-22] template specialization bug #2 (gcc3.2) State-Changed-From-To: analyzed->closed State-Changed-By: lerdsuwa State-Changed-When: Sun Mar 16 12:45:09 2003 State-Changed-Why: Not a bug. It's the way partial ordering works. To see how this works, consider a simpler example: template<typename T> void foo (T t); // #1 template<typename U> void foo (X<U> x); // #2 To find out which one is more specialized, you substitute function argument into another function parameter and try to deduce template parameter. First, take a 't' of type 'T' from foo #1 and substitute into foo #2 'u' parameter of type 'X<U>' like this. foo<U>(X<U> t); // #2, where t of is any type T You find that 't' can be any type, not necessary an instantiation of class template X. So deduction of 'U' fails. Here #1 is not more specialized than #2. On the other hand, take a 'u' of type 'X<U>' from foo #2 and put into foo #1: foo<T>(T x); // #1, where x of is any type X<U> You can duduce T = X<U> here. So the deduction succeeds. And #2 is more specialized than #1. Deciding which specialization to use is based on the above algorithm (which is specified in the C++ standard). If one deduction fails, and another passes, we pick the more specialized one. However with your code: template<int shift1, typename T> void foo (T x); template<int shift2, typename T> void foo (X<U> x); 'shift1' and 'shift2' cannot be deduced by the above method, none is more specialized than the other. And both are considered during a function call. If you don't like how it works, comp.std.c++ newsgroup is the place to discuss about the behavior. http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&database=gcc&pr=8640
next reply other threads:[~2003-03-16 12:45 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2003-03-16 12:45 lerdsuwa [this message] 2003-03-16 14:56 Giovanni Bajo
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=20030316124510.29878.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=lerdsuwa@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=nbecker@fred.net \ --cc=nobody@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: linkBe 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).