RE: is it a bug or do i miss something?(about conflicts between template parameter and data member)

[éææ <longhaitao at otsc dot com dot cn>]

3x for your patient reply, and good advice :)


On Sat, 2007-11-17 at 02:30 -0800, John (Eljay) Love-Jensen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > if i made some stupid mistakes, please tell me ,3x
> 
> This is a mistake:
> #include <stdio.h>
> 
> For C++ it should be:
> #include <cstdio>
> 
> But the primary issue you are concerned about is this:
> 
> template <int type>
> Derived<type>::Derived()
>     :
>     Base(type) // <-- type here refers to Base::type member variable, which has not been initialized yet and has a garbage value.
> {
> }
> 
> I'm not sure the syntax to make the type in the Base(type) initialization list refer to the template parameter type instead of the base class Base::type member variable.  (Other than changing the name of the template parameter from "type" to something that doesn't collide.  But that's not in the spirit of the challenge!)
> 
> I've never run into this situation before, as a side effect due to the naming conventions I use moreso than by intentional diligence.
> 
> My naming conventions look something like this (a "scoping based Hungarian notation" variant):
> 
> static int sFoo; // static variables 's' prefix
> int const kFoo = 7; // constants and enums 'k' prefix
> int mFoo; // struct & class member variables 'm' prefix
> template <int Type_t> // Declared typedefs and template typename '_t' suffix
> void Blah(int inValue); // input parameters to functions 'in' prefix
> void Blah(int& outValue); // output parameters to functions 'out' prefix
> void Blah(int& ioValue); // in/out parameters to functions 'io' prefix
> void Blah(std::ostream& useStream); // usage parameter has 'use' prefix
> #define $FOO 7 // macro constants use '$' prefix
> #define FOO$($1, $2) printf($1, $2) // macro function use '$' suffix
> 
> The distinction between 'io' and 'use' is a semantic subtly.
> 
> The use of '$' character in preprocessor directives is non-standard -- although supported by every preprocessor I have ever used, and I've used many of them.  It is a way to avoid identifier collisions between the preprocessor defines and the C++ code.
> 
> The above naming convention is primarily intended to aid in code legibility and help code maintenance.  It just by happenstance avoids the situation you ran into.
> 
> There are a few other conventions that go beyond the "scoping Hungarian", such as interface classes having 'I' prefix, simple concept interface classes having 'Can' prefix, and a private 'Do' method, ala:
> 
> class CanRead
> {
> public:
>     virtual ~CanRead() { }
>     void Read(std::ostream&);
> private:
>     virtual void DoRead(std::ostream&) const = 0;
> };
> 
> HTH,
> --Eljay