This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Template Template Matching Problem on Defaults (old g++ extension induced problem -- bug 9737)
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu>
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Cc: Tyson Whitehead <twhitehe at uwo dot ca>
- Date: 20 Sep 2004 11:52:20 -0500
- Subject: Re: Template Template Matching Problem on Defaults (old g++ extension induced problem -- bug 9737)
- Organization: Texas A&M University, Department of Computer Science
- References: <Pine.LNX.email@example.com>
Wolfgang Bangerth <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
| > Anyone have an update for September 2004?
| I don't, but I just files PR 17570 for this. You may want to put yourself
| on the CC list.
| > PS: I also don't get what analogue this extension was suppose to
| > maintain with function function parameters (see bug report). I just
| > finished checking, and g++ certainly does not allow things like
| > assigning an n (non default) plus m (default) argument function to an n
| > argument function pointer.
| That isn't the point. The reason was so that people can match
| etc to template template parameters with only one template argument,
| despite the fact that these classes have more than just one, and possibly
| different numbers of template arguments, all of which except for the first
| have default arguments.
The Core group clarified the point saying that template parameters
and default arguments are intended to be treated the same way as
function parameters and default arguments.
With template aliases coming in, I think this extension can go away.