home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: fido.asd.sgi.com!austern
- From: vandevod@cs.rpi.edu (David Vandevoorde)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: Member templates
- Date: 19 Apr 1996 10:14:29 PDT
- Organization: RPI Computer Science
- Approved: austern@isolde.mti.sgi.com
- Message-ID: <xsoivewlve3.fsf@avs.cs.rpi.edu>
- References: <31763F3F.805@cs.tu-berlin.de>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: isolde.mti.sgi.com
- X-Original-Date: 18 Apr 1996 23:56:04 -0400
- In-Reply-To: Roman Lechtchinsky's message of 19 Apr 96 00:25:29 GMT
- X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.1
- X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++
- iQBVAwUBMXfJ9ky4NqrwXLNJAQGQogH+IeiaHyK/0hPHEWaiUG9+6eRSHfvhpMAr
- brguEM5w78D937ZpIVS0soPqtd3KdtBrVYCg2A66u9xcOY3VhYcexg==
- =B633
- Originator: austern@isolde.mti.sgi.com
-
- >>>>> "RL" == Roman Lechtchinsky <wolfro@cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:
- [...]
- RL> class Base
- RL> {
- RL> virtual void f(int);
- RL> };
-
- RL> class Derived : Base
- RL> {
- RL> template<class T> void f(T);
- RL> };
-
- RL> Is this legal? If so, will the template function f(int) override
- RL> Base::f(int)? If so, when will it be instantiated? And, last but not
- RL> least, which section of the DWP handles this case? Thanks in advance.
-
- I believe this is legal and the instantiated member function is not
- virtual (i.e., no overriding), but my reason extrapolates the WPs
- somewhat. I base this on the fact that the `signature' of a template
- function includes the actual template arguments ([temp.over.link]
- 14.10.4/3 in the April CD), and that when [class.virtual] 10.3/2
- requires `same name', `name' really means template-id and not just
- template-name ([temp.names] 14.1).
-
- Daveed
- ---
- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles: Try just posting with your
- newsreader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
- comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
- Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
- Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu
- ]
-