Template behaves differently with same types

[David Richardson]

Does anyone know if this code is legal?

template<typename T>
struct holder{

holder(T &t):t_(t){};

T t_;

};

int main(){
int *a = new int[10];
int *front_of_a = &a[0];

holder<int*> h1(a);
holder<int*> h2(front_of_a);

//below does not compile with gcc 3.3.1, icc 6.0, icc 7.0
holder<int*> h3(&a[0]);

}//main

It seems to me like the line where h2 is instantiated should have the
same type as the line with h3 is. But gcc and icc disagree. Does
anyone know what is happening here? The gcc error indicates that T =
int* for h3.

Thanks,
Dave

[John Harrison]

On 1 Jul 2004 13:04:55 -0700, David Richardson <dg***@drexel.edu> wrote:

Does anyone know if this code is legal?

template<typename T>
struct holder{
holder(T &t):t_(t){};
T t_;
};

int main(){
int *a = new int[10];
int *front_of_a = &a[0];
holder<int*> h1(a);
holder<int*> h2(front_of_a);

//below does not compile with gcc 3.3.1, icc 6.0, icc 7.0
holder<int*> h3(&a[0]);

}//main

It seems to me like the line where h2 is instantiated should have the
same type as the line with h3 is. But gcc and icc disagree. Does
anyone know what is happening here? The gcc error indicates that T =
int* for h3.

Thanks,
Dave

Nothing to do with templates but it's not legal. The constructor for
holder is a non-const reference and therefore cannot be bound to the
expression &a[0].

holder(T const& t):t_(t){}

would be legal.