From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9645 invoked by alias); 20 Sep 2004 18:22:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 9621 invoked from network); 20 Sep 2004 18:22:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO pony.its.uwo.ca) (129.100.2.63) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 20 Sep 2004 18:22:33 -0000 Received: from spork.its.uwo.ca (ride.its.uwo.ca [10.10.10.10]) by pony.its.uwo.ca (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8KIMWdK018139 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 14:22:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from whitehead.es.uwo.ca (whitehead.es.uwo.ca [129.100.36.190]) by spork.its.uwo.ca (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8KIMK9M015938 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 14:22:20 -0400 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]) by whitehead.es.uwo.ca with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1C9Snr-0004i1-00; Mon, 20 Sep 2004 14:22:19 -0400 From: Tyson Whitehead To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Template Template Matching Problem on Defaults (old g++ extension induced problem -- bug 9737) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 19:04:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 Cc: Wolfgang Bangerth , Gabriel Dos Reis References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200409201422.17316.twhitehe@uwo.ca> X-Spam-Score: 0 () X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.39 X-SW-Source: 2004-09/txt/msg01179.txt.bz2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On September 20, 2004 12:11 pm, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote: > That isn't the point. The reason was so that people can match > std::vector > std::set > ... > etc to template template parameters with only one template argument, > despite the fact that these classes have more than just one, and possibly > different numbers of template arguments, all of which except for the first > have default arguments. On September 20, 2004 12:52 pm, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > The Core group clarified the point saying that template parameters > and default arguments are intended to be treated the same way as > function parameters and default arguments. >=20 > With template aliases coming in, I think this extension can go away. Thanks all, for the clarification. It probably moot for this case, as it sounds like this non-core extension w= ill=20 probably be going out with template alias coming in, but shouldn't g++=20 extensions that provide extra candidates over the C++ standard be made to=20 match less strongly then C++ standard candidates to ensure g++ specific=20 ambiguities aren't introduced into perfectly valid code (such as that in th= e=20 original email)? - -T - --=20 Tyson Whitehead (-twhitehe at uwo.ca -- WSC-) Computer Engineer Dept. of Applied Mathematics, Graduate Student- Applied Mathematics University of Western Ontario, GnuPG Key ID# 0x8A2AB5D8 London, Ontario, Canada -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBTx/XRXbLmIoqtdgRAjM+AKDtkEIRgvQQ71GuELB2BC62I9gRZgCfeFOB WqOklFtxnqAJjA1M/3ii+rs=3D =3DuH3W -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----