Re: Template specialization and static data member
 

"Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
news:veu5ulofjggt6b@corp.supernews.com...
> "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> > ---------------------------------------
> > The error I get is the following:
> >
> > $ cxx x.cpp
> >
> > foo<1>::bars[] =
> > ........^
> > %CXX-E-NOCREINCOBJ, Cannot create member "foo<id>::bars [with id=1]" of
> > incomplete type "const foo<1>::bar []".
> > at line number 5 in file DISK$USER1:[POSNET]X.CPP;6
> >
> >
> > ----------------------
> >
> > Am I wrong, or is it the compiler? Workaround available?
>
>
> Try giving it a size:
>
> ... foo<1>::bars[3] =
>
> Victor
>

Doesn't help. I've been doing some further investigation and it seems like
the compiler requires me to write an explicit specialization for the entire
class when the data type of the static data member isn't a built-in.

Is the compiler right (as said, g++ and VC.NET allows it)?

// Johan

Re: Template specialization and static data member
 

"Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
> news:veu5ulofjggt6b@corp.supernews.com...
> > "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> > > ---------------------------------------
> > > The error I get is the following:
> > >
> > > $ cxx x.cpp
> > >
> > > foo<1>::bars[] =
> > > ........^
> > > %CXX-E-NOCREINCOBJ, Cannot create member "foo<id>::bars [with id=1]"
of
> > > incomplete type "const foo<1>::bar []".
> > > at line number 5 in file DISK$USER1:[POSNET]X.CPP;6
> > >
> > >
> > > ----------------------
> > >
> > > Am I wrong, or is it the compiler? Workaround available?
> >
> >
> > Try giving it a size:
> >
> > ... foo<1>::bars[3] =
> >
> > Victor
> >
>
> Doesn't help. I've been doing some further investigation and it seems like
> the compiler requires me to write an explicit specialization for the
entire
> class when the data type of the static data member isn't a built-in.
>
> Is the compiler right (as said, g++ and VC.NET allows it)?

I probably missed the part that you were specialising it, and I
apologise. Yes, if you need a specialisation of a member, you
will have to first specialise the entire class. Language does
require that.

Victor

Re: Template specialization and static data member
 

"Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
news:vfgk6n5q69ov64@corp.supernews.com...
> "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> > "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
> > news:veu5ulofjggt6b@corp.supernews.com...
> > > "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> > > > ---------------------------------------
> > > > The error I get is the following:
> > > >

[snip]

> >
> > Is the compiler right (as said, g++ and VC.NET allows it)?
>
> I probably missed the part that you were specialising it, and I
> apologise. Yes, if you need a specialisation of a member, you
> will have to first specialise the entire class. Language does
> require that.
>

Thanks for your reply (and sorry if reiterating). I'd just like to ask if
you're really sure if this true for a _static_ data member, I've tried to
read up on it in the standard - and it's not really clear to me what it says
there (it states that static data members can be explicitly specialized, but
no examples included).

The thing that makes me wonder is that I can do this using g++ 3.0x, g++ 3.2
and VC.NET 7.x. It also works with the very same compiler that caused me to
send the originating post of this thread (DEC C++ 6.5 for OpenVMS), as long
as I use a built-in data type, IIRC (out of my head only):

------------------ example.cpp -----------
#include <iostream>

template<int id>
struct foo
{
static const double d;
};

template<>
const double
foo<1>::d = 0.1;

template<>
const double
foo<2>::d = 0.2;

int main(int, char*[])
{
std::cout << foo<1>::d << std::endl; // prints "0.1"
std::cout << foo<2>::d << std::endl; // prints "0.2"
std::cout << foo<0>::d << std::endl; // fails a link-time
return 0;
}

--------------------------------------------

Regards // Johan

Re: Template specialization and static data member
 

"Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
>
> "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
> news:vfgk6n5q69ov64@corp.supernews.com...
> > "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> > > "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
> > > news:veu5ulofjggt6b@corp.supernews.com...
> > > > "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> > > > > ---------------------------------------
> > > > > The error I get is the following:
> > > > >
>
> [snip]
>
> > >
> > > Is the compiler right (as said, g++ and VC.NET allows it)?
> >
> > I probably missed the part that you were specialising it, and I
> > apologise. Yes, if you need a specialisation of a member, you
> > will have to first specialise the entire class. Language does
> > require that.
> >
>
> Thanks for your reply (and sorry if reiterating). I'd just like to ask if
> you're really sure if this true for a _static_ data member, I've tried to
> read up on it in the standard - and it's not really clear to me what it
says
> there (it states that static data members can be explicitly specialized,
but
> no examples included).
>
> The thing that makes me wonder is that I can do this using g++ 3.0x, g++
3.2
> and VC.NET 7.x. It also works with the very same compiler that caused me
to
> send the originating post of this thread (DEC C++ 6.5 for OpenVMS), as
long
> as I use a built-in data type, IIRC (out of my head only):
>
> ------------------ example.cpp -----------
> #include <iostream>
>
> template<int id>
> struct foo
> {
> static const double d;
> };
>
> template<>
> const double
> foo<1>::d = 0.1;
>
> template<>
> const double
> foo<2>::d = 0.2;
>
> int main(int, char*[])
> {
> std::cout << foo<1>::d << std::endl; // prints "0.1"
> std::cout << foo<2>::d << std::endl; // prints "0.2"
> std::cout << foo<0>::d << std::endl; // fails a link-time
> return 0;
> }
>
> --------------------------------------------

Alright, I should pay attention this time...

Full specialisations of member functions or static data members
of a class template can be made without specialising the entire
class. That's what you're seeing here.

Partial specialisation of a member function or static data member
requires the existence of its enclosing partial specialisation of
the class template.

The original error you were getting was due to the fact that you
had a _definition_ of an explicit specialisation of a static data
member of an incomplete type. That prompted me to suggest the
use of the size.

-------------------------------------------- this code
template<int i> struct A
{
struct B { int j; };
static B b[];
};

template<> A<1>::B A<1>::b[];

int main()
{
A<1>::b[0].j = 42;
}
--------------------------------------------------------
contains the declaration of the explicit specialisation of a static
data member and makes the use of it. It should and does compile OK.

Perhaps the problem you've been having with the declarations of
static data members explicit specialisations are due to compiler
non-compliance?

Victor

Re: Template specialization and static data member
 

"Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
news:vfh7725nmil5ff@corp.supernews.com...
> "Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
> >

[snip]

> >
> > --------------------------------------------
>
> Alright, I should pay attention this time...
>
> Full specialisations of member functions or static data members
> of a class template can be made without specialising the entire
> class. That's what you're seeing here.

Yes, that was what I believed as well. Interpreting the standard though,
requires a bit more practice for me.

>
> Partial specialisation of a member function or static data member
> requires the existence of its enclosing partial specialisation of
> the class template.
>
> The original error you were getting was due to the fact that you
> had a _definition_ of an explicit specialisation of a static data
> member of an incomplete type. That prompted me to suggest the
> use of the size.

No, I originally had the declaration (in the header file) _and_ a definition
(in the source file).

>
> -------------------------------------------- this code
> template<int i> struct A
> {
> struct B { int j; };
> static B b[];
> };
>
> template<> A<1>::B A<1>::b[];
>
> int main()
> {
> A<1>::b[0].j = 42;
> }
> --------------------------------------------------------
> contains the declaration of the explicit specialisation of a static
> data member and makes the use of it. It should and does compile OK.

Compiles ok, does not link (typo?) - or are you having the definition
elsewhere?

>
> Perhaps the problem you've been having with the declarations of
> static data members explicit specialisations are due to compiler
> non-compliance?

Probably, that's what I believed. I just wanted to get some second opinions.

Thanks // Johan

Re: Template specialization and static data member
 

"Johan Nilsson" <johan.nilsson@esrange.ssc.se> wrote...
>
> "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@attAbi.com> wrote in message
> news:vfh7725nmil5ff@corp.supernews.com...
[...]
> > -------------------------------------------- this code
> > template<int i> struct A
> > {
> > struct B { int j; };
> > static B b[];
> > };
> >
> > template<> A<1>::B A<1>::b[];
> >
> > int main()
> > {
> > A<1>::b[0].j = 42;
> > }
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > contains the declaration of the explicit specialisation of a static
> > data member and makes the use of it. It should and does compile OK.
>
> Compiles ok, does not link (typo?) - or are you having the definition
> elsewhere?

I didn't try to link it. And it should link OK if the definition
exists in the program (in a different translation unit).

V