Defining templated member function outside templated class

[chhenning]

Hi there, I'm surprised the following construct seems to be illegal:

template< typename T >
struct A
{
template< typename K >
void do_some( const K& );
};

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some<K>( const K& k )
{}

I have tried several compilers, include Comeau and they all fail to
compile. Is the above code not allowed by the current standard?

Regards,
Christian

[Ian Collins]

chhenning wrote:

Hi there, I'm surprised the following construct seems to be illegal:

template< typename T >
struct A
{
template< typename K >
void do_some( const K& );
};

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some<K>( const K& k )
{}

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some( const K& k )
{}

--
Ian Collins.

[Bo Persson]

chhenning wrote:

Hi there, I'm surprised the following construct seems to be illegal:

template< typename T >
struct A
{
template< typename K >
void do_some( const K& );
};

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some<K>( const K& k )
{}

I have tried several compilers, include Comeau and they all fail to
compile. Is the above code not allowed by the current standard?

No, but only becase it is wrong. :-)

The code do_some<Kwould indicate a specialization of the function,
which is not allowed. You should instead try:

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some( const K& k )
{}

Bo Persson

[=?UTF-8?B?RXJpayBXaWtzdHLDtm0=?=]

On 2008-02-13 19:04, chhenning wrote:

Hi there, I'm surprised the following construct seems to be illegal:

template< typename T >
struct A
{
template< typename K >
void do_some( const K& );
};

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some<K>( const K& k )
{}

I have tried several compilers, include Comeau and they all fail to
compile. Is the above code not allowed by the current standard?

I do not know why this is illegal (neither the motivation nor the
chapter and verse of the standard) but the following works (in VC++ 2008
Express):

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some( const K& k )
{}

--
Erik Wikström

[Ian Collins]

Erik Wikström wrote:

On 2008-02-13 19:04, chhenning wrote:

>Hi there, I'm surprised the following construct seems to be illegal:

template< typename T >
struct A
{
template< typename K >
void do_some( const K& );
};

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some<K>( const K& k )
{}

I have tried several compilers, include Comeau and they all fail to
compile. Is the above code not allowed by the current standard?

I do not know why this is illegal (neither the motivation nor the
chapter and verse of the standard) but the following works (in VC++ 2008
Express):

It appears as a partial specialisation.

--
Ian Collins.

[chhenning]

Thank you all!
On Feb 13, 1:34*pm, Ian Collins <[e-mail]:

Erik Wikström wrote:

On 2008-02-13 19:04, chhenning wrote:

Hi there, I'm surprised the following construct seems to be illegal:

template< typename T >
struct A
{
* *template< typename K >
* *void do_some( const K& );
};

template< typename T >
template< typename K >
void A<T>::do_some<K>( const K& k )
{}

I have tried several compilers, include Comeau and they all fail to
compile. Is the above code not allowed by the current standard?

I do not know why this is illegal (neither the motivation nor the
chapter and verse of the standard) but the following works (in VC++ 2008
Express):

It appears as a partial specialisation.

--
Ian Collins.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -