pure virtual function in template class

[Mike -- Email Ignored]

Is a pure virtual function in allowed in a template
base class? In any case, I have one working. Am I
skating on thin ice?
Thanks,
Mike.

[puzzlecracker]

On Jul 10, 8:49 am, Mike -- Email Ignored <[e-mail]>
wrote:

Is a pure virtual function in allowed in a template
base class? In any case, I have one working. Am I
skating on thin ice?
Thanks,
Mike.

Yes, it can be in the template class, but it can NOT be a virtual
template member function

[Mike -- Email Ignored]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 05:53:45 -0700, puzzlecracker wrote:

On Jul 10, 8:49 am, Mike -- Email Ignored <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Is a pure virtual function in allowed in a template base class? In any
case, I have one working. Am I skating on thin ice?
Thanks,
Mike.

Yes, it can be in the template class, but it can NOT be a virtual
template member function

I don't understand how it could be pure, but not a member.
In any case, here is code that works on my system showing
exactly what I mean.
Mike.

// virt_temp.cc 07/10/08
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

template <class TYP>
class BaseT
{
protected:
BaseT(TYP x,TYP y) : x_(x),y_(y){}
void doAll(){cout << "x_="<<x_<<',';doChild(y_);cout<<endl;}
virtual void doChild(TYP a)=0;// pure virtual member function
private:
TYP x_;
TYP y_;
};

class Child : protected BaseT<int>
{
public:
Child() : BaseT<int>(1,2){}
void doThings(){doAll();}
private:
virtual void doChild(int a);
};

void Child::doChild(int a){cout<<"a="<<a;}

int main(int argc, const char* argv[])
{
Child child;
child.doThings();
}

[Victor Bazarov]

Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 05:53:45 -0700, puzzlecracker wrote:

>On Jul 10, 8:49 am, Mike -- Email Ignored <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>>Is a pure virtual function in allowed in a template base class? In any
case, I have one working. Am I skating on thin ice?
Thanks,
Mike.

Yes, it can be in the template class, but it can NOT be a virtual
template member function

I don't understand how it could be pure, but not a member.
[..]

It's the case when too much information actually hurt. What clacker is
telling you is that you can't have a template member declared virtual
(pure or not):

class foo {
template<class Tvirtual void bar(T const&); // error
};

, that's, all.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Mike -- Email Ignored]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:56:16 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

[...]

>
It's the case when too much information actually hurt. What clacker is
telling you is that you can't have a template member declared virtual
(pure or not):

class foo {
template<class Tvirtual void bar(T const&); // error
};

, that's, all.

V

Then my working example is just dumb luck?
Or might it be a non-standard gnu add-on?
Mike.

[Victor Bazarov]

Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:56:16 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

[...]

>It's the case when too much information actually hurt. What clacker is
telling you is that you can't have a template member declared virtual
(pure or not):

class foo {
template<class Tvirtual void bar(T const&); // error
};

, that's, all.

V

Then my working example is just dumb luck?

"Dumb luck"? I am not sure how that is applicable here. Your example
has no virtual functions that are member templates.

Or might it be a non-standard gnu add-on?

No, it seems to be fine (except that you forgot to include <ostream>,
but it's a common mistake often offset by the fact that the compiler
includes one along with <iostream>, behind the scenes).

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Mike -- Email Ignored]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:48:36 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:56:16 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

[...]

>>It's the case when too much information actually hurt. What clacker
is telling you is that you can't have a template member declared
virtual (pure or not):

class foo {
template<class Tvirtual void bar(T const&); // error
};

, that's, all.

V

Then my working example is just dumb luck?

"Dumb luck"? I am not sure how that is applicable here. Your example
has no virtual functions that are member templates.

Then what is my function:

virtual void doChild(TYP a)=0;// pure virtual member function

Why is this ok?

[...]

Mike.

[Pete Becker]

On 2008-07-10 13:20:37 -0400, Mike -- Email Ignored
<m_*************@yahoo.comsaid:

>
Then what is my function:

virtual void doChild(TYP a)=0;// pure virtual member function

Why is this ok?

Because a member function of a template class is not the same thing as
a template member function.

template <class T>
class C
{
public:
virtual void f(); // member function of template class
template <class Uvoid g(); // template member function of template class
};

class D
{
public:
template <class Uvoid g(); // template member function of class
};

--
Pete
Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com) Author of "The
Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and Reference
(www.petebecker.com/tr1book)

[Victor Bazarov]

Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 12:48:36 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

>Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

>>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:56:16 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

[...]
It's the case when too much information actually hurt. What clacker
is telling you is that you can't have a template member declared
virtual (pure or not):

class foo {
template<class Tvirtual void bar(T const&); // error
};

, that's, all.

V
Then my working example is just dumb luck?

"Dumb luck"? I am not sure how that is applicable here. Your example
has no virtual functions that are member templates.

Then what is my function:

virtual void doChild(TYP a)=0;// pure virtual member function

It's a pure virtual function, a member of the class template. Since it
is a member of a template, it is a template itself, but it's not a
member template. It's a template member. Confusing, isn't it?

>
Why is this ok?

Why wouldn't it be? Every instance of your class template gets its own
virtual function. For example, your BaseT<inthas

virtual void BaseT<int>::doChild(int) = 0;

and it's pure, so any derived class has to override it if it wants to be
non-abstract (and your 'Child' provides it); and if you had some other
instance of your template, say, 'BaseT<std::vector<std::string', then
it would have

virtual void BaseT<std::vector<std::string
::doChild(std::vector<std::string) = 0;

which also has to be overridden in the derived class, should you want to
instantiate the derived class by itself (make it non-abstract).

Please feel free to ask more questions.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Mike -- Email Ignored]

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:28:40 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

[...]

>>
Then what is my function:

virtual void doChild(TYP a)=0;// pure virtual member function

It's a pure virtual function, a member of the class template. Since it
is a member of a template, it is a template itself, but it's not a
member template. It's a template member. Confusing, isn't it?

[...]

Yes, thanks, it is clear now (pardon my laughter). Is there somewhere
is the standard I might see this?

Mike.

[Victor Bazarov]

Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:28:40 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:

>Mike -- Email Ignored wrote:

[...]

>>Then what is my function:

virtual void doChild(TYP a)=0;// pure virtual member function

It's a pure virtual function, a member of the class template. Since it
is a member of a template, it is a template itself, but it's not a
member template. It's a template member. Confusing, isn't it?

[...]

Yes, thanks, it is clear now (pardon my laughter). Is there somewhere
is the standard I might see this?

See what, exactly? The whole chapter 14 is dedicated to templates, the
chapter 10 is dedicated to derived classes...

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[James Kanze]

On Jul 10, 2:49 pm, Mike -- Email Ignored <[e-mail]>
wrote:

Is a pure virtual function in allowed in a template base
class? In any case, I have one working. Am I skating on thin
ice?

No. Why should there be any problem? The instantiation of a
class template is just like any other class. The same rules
apply.

--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:ja*********@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, [phone]

[Mike -- Email Ignored]

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:08:45 -0700, James Kanze wrote:

On Jul 10, 2:49 pm, Mike -- Email Ignored <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>Is a pure virtual function in allowed in a template base class? In any
case, I have one working. Am I skating on thin ice?

No. Why should there be any problem? The instantiation of a class
template is just like any other class. The same rules apply.

How about, then, a template class virtual member function that
is not pure? It is my understanding that such a virtual function
may not be inline, but, at least on the gnu c++ compiler, non-pure
functions of a template class must be inline (unless there have
been recent developments I do not know about).

Mike.

[James Kanze]

On Jul 13, 3:36 am, Mike -- Email Ignored <[e-mail]>
wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 02:08:45 -0700, James Kanze wrote:

On Jul 10, 2:49 pm, Mike -- Email Ignored <[e-mail]>
wrote:

Is a pure virtual function in allowed in a template base
class? In any case, I have one working. Am I skating on
thin ice?

No. Why should there be any problem? The instantiation of
a class template is just like any other class. The same
rules apply.

How about, then, a template class virtual member function that
is not pure?

Again, the same rules apply as with any other class. No
problem.

It is my understanding that such a virtual function
may not be inline,

Why not? One idiom (which used to be common, before templates)
even requires them to be inline.

but, at least on the gnu c++ compiler, non-pure functions of a
template class must be inline (unless there have been recent
developments I do not know about).

Nonsense. G++ has never had this restriction.

--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:ja*********@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, [phone]