avoiding object files

[Alexander Stippler]

Hello,

I have written a little library which consists of template functions and
classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very much if I
could use the library by only including some header files without having to
deal with building and linking a library or object files. Are there any
tricks how this can be achieved?
I guess not, but perhaps you know better.

Best regards,
alex

[Rob Williscroft]

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Hello,

I have written a little library which consists of template functions
and classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very
much if I could use the library by only including some header files
without having to deal with building and linking a library or object
files. Are there any tricks how this can be achieved?
I guess not, but perhaps you know better.

Instead of

class non_template
{
// whatever
};

Do:

template < typename = void >
class for_non_templat e
{
// Whatever (as above).
};

typedef for_non_templat e<> non_template;

HTH.

Rob.
--
http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/

[David Lindauer]

Rob Williscroft wrote:

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Hello,

I have written a little library which consists of template functions
and classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very
much if I could use the library by only including some header files
without having to deal with building and linking a library or object
files. Are there any tricks how this can be achieved?
I guess not, but perhaps you know better.

Instead of

class non_template
{
// whatever
};

Do:

template < typename = void >
class for_non_templat e
{
// Whatever (as above).
};

typedef for_non_templat e<> non_template;

what does it mean if you use the typename keyword in a template parameter
declaration?

Thanks,

David

[Rob Williscroft]

David Lindauer wrote in news:41******** *******@bluegra ss.net in
comp.lang.c++:

what does it mean if you use the typename keyword in a template parameter
declaration?

Its exactly the same as when you use class.

Rob.
--
http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/

[Alexander Stippler]

Rob Williscroft wrote:

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Hello,

I have written a little library which consists of template functions
and classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very
much if I could use the library by only including some header files
without having to deal with building and linking a library or object
files. Are there any tricks how this can be achieved?
I guess not, but perhaps you know better.

Instead of

class non_template
{
// whatever
};

Do:

template < typename = void >
class for_non_templat e
{
// Whatever (as above).
};

typedef for_non_templat e<> non_template;

HTH.

Rob.

That works fine for whole classes, but what about simple objects. I have
only one global variable, which I do not want to give any dummy template
parameter. Just an instantiation of a non-template class. It's only this one
object which forces the creation of a library. Any workaround?

regards,
alex

[Lionel B]

Alexander Stippler wrote:

/snip/

... I have only one global variable, which I do not want
to give any dummy template parameter. Just an instantiation
of a non-template class. It's only this one object which
forces the creation of a library. Any workaround?

Well, you could declare your global variable "extern" in the header and
demand that the *user* of the library define it somewhere.
Regards,

--
Lionel B

[Rob Williscroft]

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Rob Williscroft wrote:

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Hello,

I have written a little library which consists of template functions
and classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very
much if I could use the library by only including some header files
without having to deal with building and linking a library or object
files. Are there any tricks how this can be achieved?
I guess not, but perhaps you know better.

Instead of

class non_template
{
// whatever
};

Do:

template < typename = void >
class for_non_templat e
{
// Whatever (as above).
};

typedef for_non_templat e<> non_template;

HTH.

Rob.

That works fine for whole classes, but what about simple objects. I
have only one global variable, which I do not want to give any dummy
template parameter. Just an instantiation of a non-template class.
It's only this one object which forces the creation of a library. Any
workaround?

inline non_template &object()
{
static non_template obj = non_template();
return obj;
}
Rob.
--
http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/

[Alexander Stippler]

Rob Williscroft wrote:

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Rob Williscroft wrote:

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Hello,

I have written a little library which consists of template functions
and classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very
much if I could use the library by only including some header files
without having to deal with building and linking a library or object
files. Are there any tricks how this can be achieved?
I guess not, but perhaps you know better.
Instead of

class non_template
{
// whatever
};

Do:

template < typename = void >
class for_non_templat e
{
// Whatever (as above).
};

typedef for_non_templat e<> non_template;

HTH.

Rob.

That works fine for whole classes, but what about simple objects. I
have only one global variable, which I do not want to give any dummy
template parameter. Just an instantiation of a non-template class.
It's only this one object which forces the creation of a library. Any
workaround?

inline non_template &object()
{
static non_template obj = non_template();
return obj;
}
Rob.

Works in general. But this way I have a function call, not direct access. In
my special situation direct access to the variable is necessary. It is
called '_' and I want to use it for function arguments in special
situations, like A( _ , 1 ) and not A( _(), 1). Thus your solution does not
work for me. I'm afraid, IMO there is no solution.

regards,
alex

[Lionel B]

Alexander Stippler <st**@mathemati k.uni-ulm.de> wrote in message news:<41******@ news.uni-ulm.de>...

Rob Williscroft wrote:

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

Rob Williscroft wrote:

Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
comp.lang.c++:

> Hello,
>
> I have written a little library which consists of template functions
> and classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very
> much if I could use the library by only including some header files
> without having to deal with building and linking a library or object
> files. Are there any tricks how this can be achieved?
> I guess not, but perhaps you know better.
/snip/
I have only one global variable, which I do not want to give any dummy
template parameter. Just an instantiation of a non-template class.
It's only this one object which forces the creation of a library. Any
workaround?

inline non_template &object()
{
static non_template obj = non_template();
return obj;
}
Rob.

That's neat :)
Works in general. But this way I have a function call, not direct access. In
my special situation direct access to the variable is necessary. It is
called '_' and I want to use it for function arguments in special
situations, like A( _ , 1 ) and not A( _(), 1). Thus your solution does not
work for me. I'm afraid, IMO there is no solution.

What exactly is the problem with declaring your object "extern"?

Regards,

--
Lionel B

[Alexander Stippler]

Lionel B wrote:

Alexander Stippler <st**@mathemati k.uni-ulm.de> wrote in message
news:<41******@ news.uni-ulm.de>...

Rob Williscroft wrote:

> Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
> comp.lang.c++:
>
>> Rob Williscroft wrote:
>>
>>> Alexander Stippler wrote in news:41******@n ews.uni-ulm.de in
>>> comp.lang.c++:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I have written a little library which consists of template functions
>>>> and classes (99%) and two non-template classes. I'd appreciate very
>>>> much if I could use the library by only including some header files
>>>> without having to deal with building and linking a library or object
>>>> files. Are there any tricks how this can be achieved?
>>>> I guess not, but perhaps you know better.
/snip/
>> I have only one global variable, which I do not want to give any dummy
>> template parameter. Just an instantiation of a non-template class.
>> It's only this one object which forces the creation of a library. Any
>> workaround?
>>
>
> inline non_template &object()
> {
> static non_template obj = non_template();
> return obj;
> }
>
>
> Rob.

That's neat :)

Works in general. But this way I have a function call, not direct access.
In my special situation direct access to the variable is necessary. It is
called '_' and I want to use it for function arguments in special
situations, like A( _ , 1 ) and not A( _(), 1). Thus your solution does
not work for me. I'm afraid, IMO there is no solution.

What exactly is the problem with declaring your object "extern"?

Regards,

We want to achieve the most simple way of usage for our library since users
are students with very poor knowledge of C++ and software development at
all. They shall do numerical exercises with it (and have already done
successfully one semester).
Declaring '_' as extern would require the user to define it somewhere. On
the other hand this tiny little '_' object is a really nice piece of
syntactic sugar, we do not want to miss anymore. But it's also the one
single piece of code which prevents us from having the whole library to be
used by including headers only.

regards,
alex