This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: templated specializations get emitted in 3.3?

From: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot com>
To: Benjamin Kosnik <bkoz at redhat dot com>
Cc: bert hubert <ahu at ds9a dot nl>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 14:12:09 -0700
Subject: Re: templated specializations get emitted in 3.3?
References: <20030527144733.29101ce6.bkoz@redhat.com> <20030528081232.GA22721@outpost.ds9a.nl> <20030528154327.665981ae.bkoz@redhat.com>

On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 03:43:27PM -0500, Benjamin Kosnik wrote:
> I don't think this is a bug. 
> 
> What you are doing is providing a definition of a non-inlined member
> specialization in a header file: this is just like putting a definition
> of a non-inlined class member function in a header. 

If that header is included in two or more compilation units, it is a bug
in the user's program (violation of the one-definition rule).

> Behavior of this has definitely changed, but the current behavior seem
> defensible. Note if you add "inline" you'll have consistent behavior.

That seems like the right fix.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: templated specializations get emitted in 3.3?
  - From: bert hubert

References:
- Re: emitting templates as 'T'? Changed from 3.2 to 3.3
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik
- templated specializations get emitted in 3.3?
  - From: bert hubert
- Re: templated specializations get emitted in 3.3?
  - From: Benjamin Kosnik

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]