Template instantiation & inheritance - fixed, but can I scrap the warning I get to do it?

[Brian Budge]

I think we're saying the same thing :)  It will work for the program
when it can see the headers, and implicit instantiation is allowed.

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:00 AM, John Graham
<johngavingraham@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> I believe that since you are forcing explicit instantiation,
>> you will probably have to instantiate ALL used templates, even if they
>> are templates used by an instantiated template.   Maybe someone in the
>> know could confirm?
>
> Fair enough - no mean feat since the compiler nicely tells you what
> it's missing, I guess. It's just a puzzle to me that I didn't seem to
> have to do any extra "instantiating" in my library but I do in a test
> case - I'm obviously missing something subtle in the library.
>
>
>> Perhaps you aren't using the same flag in the compilation of your
>> program, and the code can see the template directly?  Then you would
>> have the explicitly instantiated subclass, and because you aren't
>> telling the compiler to explicitly instantiate while compiling the
>> executable, it takes care of implicitly instantiating anything used by
>> the subclass?  This is just a guess.  Do you use that flag for
>> compilation of all units?
>
> In the example I sent earlier (as in the "real" case) I use
> -fno-implicit-templates for the library, but *not* for the program.
> And the program can definitely see all the template definitions as
> they're included in header files, so I don't think that'll be the
> case...
>
> John G
>