Re: [wwwdocs] Additional C++ entries in changes.html

["Giovanni Bajo" <giovannibajo at libero dot it>]

Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:

>> +     <li>In templates, all non-dependent names are now looked up
>> and bound +  at definition time (while parsing the code), instead of
>> later when +  the template is instantiated. This is known as
>> "two-stage name +  look-up".
>
> I still maintain my objection to the last sentence.  If you don't want
> to be precise about "two-phase name lookup", simply remove that
> sentence.  There is no emergency to add to the existing confusion.

Sorry, I missed this objection while reviewing the disussion. To make things
easier, I just removed the sentence, and this is the updated diff. OK to
commit?

Giovanni Bajo


Index: changes.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/gcc/wwwdocs/htdocs/gcc-3.4/changes.html,v
retrieving revision 1.95
diff -c -3 -p -r1.95 changes.html
*** changes.html 3 Feb 2004 06:39:33 -0000 1.95
--- changes.html 8 Feb 2004 20:43:46 -0000
***************
*** 259,264 ****
--- 259,271 ----
  <h3>C++</h3>

    <ul>
+     <li>G++ is now <strong>much</strong> closer to full conformance to
+  the ISO/ANSI C++ standard. This means, among other things, that a lot
+  of invalid constructs which used to be accepted in previous versions
+  will now be rejected. It is very likely that existing C++ code will
+  need to be fixed to be more conformant, in order to compile. This
+  document lists some of the most common issues.</li>
+
      <li>A hand-written recursive-descent C++ parser has replaced the
          YACC-derived C++ parser from previous GCC releases.  The new
          parser contains much improved infrastructure needed for better
***************
*** 269,280 ****

      <li>You must now use the <code>typename</code> and
   <code>template</code> keywords to disambiguate dependent names,
!  as required by the C++ standard.</li>

      <li>In a template definition, unqualified names will no longer
          find members of a dependent base. For example,
   <pre>
!         template &lt;typename T&gt;struct B {
     int m;
     int n;
     int f ();
--- 276,334 ----

      <li>You must now use the <code>typename</code> and
   <code>template</code> keywords to disambiguate dependent names,
!  as required by the C++ standard.
!
!  <pre>
!  struct K {
!    typedef int mytype_t;
!  };
!
!  template &lt;class T1&gt; struct A {
!    template &lt;class T2&gt; struct B {
!        void callme(void);
!      };
!
!    template &lt;int N&gt; void bar(void)
!    {
!      // Use 'typename' to tell the parser that T1::mytype_t names
!      //  a type. This is needed because the name is dependent (in
!      //  this case, on template parameter T1).
!      typename T1::mytype_t x;
!      x = 0;
!    }
!  };
!
!  template &lt;class T&gt; void template_func(void)
!  {
!    // Use 'template' to prefix member templates within
!    //  dependent types (a has type A&lt;T&gt;, which depends on
!    //  the template parameter T).
!    A&lt;T&gt; a;
!    a.template bar&lt;0&gt;();
!
!    // Use 'template' to tell the parser that B is a nested
!    //  template class (dependent on template parameter T), and
!    //  'typename' because the whole A&lt;T&gt;::B&lt;int&gt; is
!    //  the name of a type (again, dependent).
!    typename A&lt;T&gt;::template B&lt;int&gt; b;
!    b.callme();
!  }
!
!  void non_template_func(void)
!  {
!    // Outside of any template class or function, no names can be
!    //  dependent, so the use of the keyword 'typename' and 'template'
!    //  is not needed (and actually forbidden).
!    A&lt;K&gt; a;
!    a.bar&lt;0&gt;();
!    A&lt;K&gt;::B&lt;float&gt; b;
!    b.callme();
!  }</pre></li>

      <li>In a template definition, unqualified names will no longer
          find members of a dependent base. For example,
   <pre>
!         template &lt;typename T&gt; struct B {
     int m;
     int n;
     int f ();
***************
*** 303,308 ****
--- 357,393 ----
     this-&gt;g ();
   }</pre></li>

+     <li>In templates, all non-dependent names are now looked up and bound
+  at definition time (while parsing the code), instead of later when
+  the template is instantiated. For instance:
+
+  <pre>
+  void foo(int);
+
+  template &lt;int&gt; struct A {
+    static void bar(void){
+      foo('a');
+    }
+  };
+
+  void foo(char);
+
+  int main()
+  {
+    A&lt;0&gt;::bar();    // Calls foo(int), used to call foo(char).
+  }
+  </pre></li>
+
+     <li>In an explicit instantiation of a class template, you must use
+  <code>class</code> or <code>struct</code> before the template-id:
+
+  <pre>
+  template &lt;int N&gt;
+  class A {};
+
+  template A&lt;0&gt;;         // error, not accepted anymore
+  template class A&lt;0&gt;;   // OK</pre></li>
+
      <li>The "named return value" and "implicit typename"
   extensions have been removed.</li>

***************
*** 420,425 ****
--- 505,526 ----
          <code>NULL</code>.  These changes are incorporated into the
          libstdc++ runtime library.</li>

+     <li>Using a name introduced by a typedef in a friend declaration or in an
+  explicit instantiation is now rejected, as specified by the ISO C++
+  standard.
+  <pre>
+  class A;
+  typedef A B;
+  class C {
+    friend class B;      // error, no typedef name here
+    friend B;            // error, friend always needs class/struct/enum
+    friend class A;      // OK
+  };
+
+  template &lt;int&gt; class Q {};
+  typedef Q&lt;0&gt; R;
+  template class R;      // error, no typedef name here
+  template class Q&lt;0&gt;;   // OK</pre></li>
    </ul>

  <h3>Objective-C</h3>