Deriving from std::basic_stre ambuf

I can not seem to get this to compile with either gcc 3.4 or MSVC++ .NET
2003... (source follows first):
---= BEGIN MyStreamBuffer. h =---
// #IFDEF redundancy left out.
#include <streambuf>

template< class MyElem >
class MyStreamBuffer : public std::basic_stre ambuf< MyElem >
{
protected:
int_type overflow( int_type Data = traits_type::eo f() );
};

--= END MyStreamBuffer. h =---

---= BEGIN MyStreamBuffer. cpp =---
#include "MyStreamBuffer .h"

template< class MyElem >
int_type MyStreamBuffer: :overflow( int_type Data = traits_type::eo f() )
{
return 0;
}

---= END MyStreamBuffer. cpp =---

And then I have a basic "int main( /* etc */ )" which merely constructs the
object (without 'new'). I know there's something wrong... as both compilers
I have tried fail to compile the source. I have tried (in the *.cpp file) to
use 'int_type' as "MyStreamBuffer < MyElem >::int_type to no avail.

*If* I leave the definition for the 'overflow' method within the definition
of the class it works no problem (that I can see). I would be very grateful
if someone had a reason why this can't be done... or just a very basic class
that is derived from std::basic_stre ambuf that has implementation and the
declaration separated by files.

Thank you!

[John Harrison]

On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 06:16:38 GMT, <ye**@twenty.co m> wrote:

I can not seem to get this to compile with either gcc 3.4 or MSVC++ .NET
2003... (source follows first):
---= BEGIN MyStreamBuffer. h =---
// #IFDEF redundancy left out.
#include <streambuf>

template< class MyElem >
class MyStreamBuffer : public std::basic_stre ambuf< MyElem >
{
protected:
int_type overflow( int_type Data = traits_type::eo f() );
};

--= END MyStreamBuffer. h =---

---= BEGIN MyStreamBuffer. cpp =---
#include "MyStreamBuffer .h"

template< class MyElem >
int_type MyStreamBuffer: :overflow( int_type Data = traits_type::eo f() )
{
return 0;
}

---= END MyStreamBuffer. cpp =---

And then I have a basic "int main( /* etc */ )" which merely constructs
the
object (without 'new'). I know there's something wrong... as both
compilers
I have tried fail to compile the source. I have tried (in the *.cpp
file) to
use 'int_type' as "MyStreamBuffer < MyElem >::int_type to no avail.

*If* I leave the definition for the 'overflow' method within the
definition
of the class it works no problem (that I can see). I would be very
grateful
if someone had a reason why this can't be done... or just a very basic
class
that is derived from std::basic_stre ambuf that has implementation and the
declaration separated by files.

Thank you!

Two things wrong

1) You should not repeat the default argument when you define a function.
Drop ' = traits_type::eo f()' from your function definition (but not your
declaration).

2) All template code should go into header files anyway (otherwise you get
linker errors). See the FAQ
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...html#faq-34.12

john

"John Harrison" <jo************ *@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:opsceg92pw 212331@andronic us...

On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 06:16:38 GMT, <ye**@twenty.co m> wrote:
Two things wrong

1) You should not repeat the default argument when you define a function.
Drop ' = traits_type::eo f()' from your function definition (but not your
declaration).

2) All template code should go into header files anyway (otherwise you get
linker errors). See the FAQ
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...html#faq-34.12
john

Thank you for the quick response. (I thought the inability to separate code
was a problem with old compilers.) I have since been educated... thank you
John.

ty!

[John Harrison]

On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 06:26:01 GMT, <ye**@twenty.co m> wrote:

"John Harrison" <jo************ *@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:opsceg92pw 212331@andronic us...

On Sun, 08 Aug 2004 06:16:38 GMT, <ye**@twenty.co m> wrote:
Two things wrong

1) You should not repeat the default argument when you define a
function.
Drop ' = traits_type::eo f()' from your function definition (but not your
declaration).

2) All template code should go into header files anyway (otherwise you
get
linker errors). See the FAQ

http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lit...html#faq-34.12

john

Thank you for the quick response. (I thought the inability to separate
code
was a problem with old compilers.) I have since been educated... thank
you
John.

The export keyword solves this problem, but very few compilers support it.
One that does is Comeau C++.

http://www.comeaucomputing.com/4.0/d...an/export.html

john