Please have a look at the following program:
#include <iostream>
template <const int array[], size_t index>
class ArrayIndex
{
public:
static const int value = array[index];
};
extern const int array[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
int main()
{
std::cout <<
ArrayIndex<array, 0>::value << "," <<
ArrayIndex<array, 1>::value << "," <<
ArrayIndex<array, 2>::value << "," <<
ArrayIndex<array, 3>::value << "," <<
ArrayIndex<array, 4>::value;
}
Output is, on my C++ compiler (VS 2003): 0,0,0,0,0 while I'd expect that the
output is 1,2,3,4,5. What actually does the C++ Standard say about this? In
other words, is the above program correct and if it is, what should be its
output with a standard-compliant compiler ? Moreover, if the program is
correct, is the expression 'array[index]' within the ArrayIndex class
regarded as a constant expression ?
(note that I had to declare the array with 'extern', which shouldn't be
necessary by the Standard, as this array has external linkage, anyway.
However, the compiler issues an error if I don't do this. So I have reasons
to suspect that the compiler is not standard-compliant).
Regards,
Rade 7 3615
template <const int array[], size_t index>
class ArrayIndex
{
public:
static const int value;
};
template <const int array[], size_t index>
const int ArrayIndex<array, index>::value = array[index];
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Static member definition should be separated from its declaration.
"serock" <s.******@gmail.com> wrote in message template <const int array[], size_t index> class ArrayIndex { public: static const int value; };
template <const int array[], size_t index> const int ArrayIndex<array, index>::value = array[index]; ----------------------------------------------------------------- Static member definition should be separated from its declaration.
This is not required for static const integral types (int, char, bool, long,
short). I think the OP's code is legal, though my version of g++ and
Borland both complain.
Siemel Naran wrote in
news:oZ*******************@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net in
comp.lang.c++: "serock" <s.******@gmail.com> wrote in message
template <const int array[], size_t index> class ArrayIndex { public: static const int value; };
template <const int array[], size_t index> const int ArrayIndex<array, index>::value = array[index]; ----------------------------------------------------------------- Static member definition should be separated from its declaration.
This is not required for static const integral types (int, char, bool, long, short). I think the OP's code is legal, though my version of g++ and Borland both complain.
The problem is that the initializer "array[ index ]" *isn't* a
compile time constant (intergral constant expression).
IOW, the out of class initialization is required.
Rob.
-- http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/
"Rob Williscroft" <rt*@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message Siemel Naran wrote in This is not required for static const integral types (int, char, bool, long, short). I think the OP's code is legal, though my version of g++ and Borland both complain.
The problem is that the initializer "array[ index ]" *isn't* a compile time constant (intergral constant expression).
IOW, the out of class initialization is required.
Do you have a quote from the standard? I agree that if if 'array' has type
"int *" then array[3] is not an integral constant, but if it has type "int
const *" then array[3] should be a constant so long as array itself is
constant, which is the case because it is extern const.
In any case, I made the initialization out of line for g++ to compile it,
and I still witness the original behavior that it prints "0,0,0,0,0,"
instead of "1,2,3,4,5,". Strange. Yet when I force the instantiation of
the specific classes by using template class, it does work. Stranger.
"Rade" <no*************@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:covce2$e84 #include <iostream>
template <const int array[], size_t index> class ArrayIndex { public: static const int value = array[index]; };
extern const int array[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
int main() { std::cout << ArrayIndex<array, 0>::value << "," << ArrayIndex<array, 1>::value << "," << ArrayIndex<array, 2>::value << "," << ArrayIndex<array, 3>::value << "," << ArrayIndex<array, 4>::value; }
Output is, on my C++ compiler (VS 2003): 0,0,0,0,0 while I'd expect that
the output is 1,2,3,4,5.
This is quite strange. I added statements to force the compiler to
instantiate the ArraynIndex classes, and it works now, at least on g++
2.95.2-6. Add the five lines (without >) to your program and see if it
works.
extern const int array[] = { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
template class ArrayIndex<array, 0>;
template class ArrayIndex<array, 1>;
template class ArrayIndex<array, 2>;
template class ArrayIndex<array, 3>;
template class ArrayIndex<array, 4>; int main()
What actually does the C++ Standard say about this? In other words, is the above program correct and if it is, what should be its output with a standard-compliant compiler ? Moreover, if the program is correct, is the expression 'array[index]' within the ArrayIndex class regarded as a constant expression ?
Seems to me array[index] is an integral expression because array has type T
const *const, but don't know what the standard says.
(note that I had to declare the array with 'extern', which shouldn't be necessary by the Standard, as this array has external linkage, anyway. However, the compiler issues an error if I don't do this. So I have
reasons to suspect that the compiler is not standard-compliant).
Const objects have internal linkage by default, so the extern is necessary.
> Static member definition should be separated from its declaration.
OK, it's better now, but does C++ language require it, or the requirement
comes from Microsoft ?
As far as I know, one should be able to define static consts inside the
class as well as outside, as long as they are initialized by a constant
expression. That's why I asked about whether array[index] is regarded as a
constant expression in this context. If it is constant, then my code should
work (but it doesn't). If it is not constant, then the compiler should have
warned me that I was trying to initialize a static const within a class with
a nonconstant expression (but it hasn't). Am I right ?
Rade
Siemel Naran wrote in
news:Z7*******************@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net in
comp.lang.c++: "Rob Williscroft" <rt*@freenet.co.uk> wrote in message Siemel Naran wrote in
> This is not required for static const integral types (int, char, > bool, long, short). I think the OP's code is legal, though my > version of g++ and Borland both complain.
The problem is that the initializer "array[ index ]" *isn't* a compile time constant (intergral constant expression).
IOW, the out of class initialization is required.
Do you have a quote from the standard?
5.19 & 5.2.1
Rob.
-- http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/ This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics
by: Gianni Mariani |
last post by:
Does anyone know if this is supposed to work ?
template <unsigned N>
int strn( const char str )
{
return N;
}
#include <iostream>
|
by: Fraser Ross |
last post by:
I need to know the syntax for writing a reference of an array. I haven't
seen it done often. I have a class with a member array and I want a member
function to return an reference to it. ...
|
by: prashna |
last post by:
Hi Guru's,
Here are my questions...
1)Why does c allows an extra "," in array intialiser?Is there any
advantage of this?
ex: int arr={1,2,3,4,5,};
^^Compiler does not give error for this!
...
|
by: danbraund |
last post by:
Hi everyone, I'm a long time C coder, who is coding his final year
project in C++ to run under the MIT click routing system. Being fairly
new to the OO side of the language, my problem is this:
...
|
by: kk_oop |
last post by:
Hi. I recently wrote a simple little template that defines an array
that checks attempts to use out of bounds indexes. The only problem is
that it does provide the use array style value...
|
by: Angel Tsankov |
last post by:
I'm thinking about using a function tamplate to verify that an
identifier is of an array type. May the following template be
used for this purpose:
template< typename T, int N >
void...
|
by: Wayne Shu |
last post by:
Why there has such a rule for the template non-type argument??
but address of an object of external linkage is acceptable!!
e.g.
template <int *p>
class C;
int i;
int arr;
|
by: tomerdr |
last post by:
Hi,
I have been asked to create a dynamic template array as an exercise.
the array should be used as follows:
CDynamicArray<City*arr; or CDynamicArray<Streetarr;
It also need to support...
|
by: Christof Warlich |
last post by:
Hi,
the subject says it all: I need to instantiate an array of objects
where each object "knows" its arrary index. So far, this is easy
as long as index is not a compile-time constant:
class ...
|
by: emmanuelkatto |
last post by:
Hi All, I am Emmanuel katto from Uganda. I want to ask what challenges you've faced while migrating a website to cloud.
Please let me know.
Thanks!
Emmanuel
|
by: BarryA |
last post by:
What are the essential steps and strategies outlined in the Data Structures and Algorithms (DSA) roadmap for aspiring data scientists? How can individuals effectively utilize this roadmap to progress...
|
by: nemocccc |
last post by:
hello, everyone, I want to develop a software for my android phone for daily needs, any suggestions?
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
There are some requirements for setting up RAID:
1. The motherboard and BIOS support RAID configuration.
2. The motherboard has 2 or more available SATA protocol SSD/HDD slots (including MSATA, M.2...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Most computers default to English, but sometimes we require a different language, especially when relocating. Forgot to request a specific language before your computer shipped? No problem! You can...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers,...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven...
|
by: Hystou |
last post by:
Overview:
Windows 11 and 10 have less user interface control over operating system update behaviour than previous versions of Windows. In Windows 11 and 10, there is no way to turn off the Windows...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing,...
| |