C++Talk.NET

Paul Pedriana · Guest

The 'a++' below fails under GCC 3.4 and EDG, but succeeds under other
compilers I've tried (including GCC 2.9x). I'm wondering where in the
C++ standard it specifies that this is illegal, because it's a new one
to me.

Take away the 'int i' template parameter and the compilation succeeds.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
template <typename T, int i>
struct A {
T a;
};

template <typename T, int i>
struct B : public A<int, i> {
void GetA() {
a++; // "error: `a' undeclared (first use this function)"
this->a++; // OK
A<int, i>::a++; // OK
}
};
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks.

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]

sashan · Guest

I think that GCC 3.4 is right for the following reason. The name
'A<int, i>' is a dependent name because it depends on the the template
parameters (in this case i). The name 'a' is a non-dependent name
because it does not depend on a template parameter. The compiler is
meant to follow the rule 'do not look up non-dependent names in a
dependent base class'. The reason why 'this->a++' compiles is because
the whole name 'this->a' is now a dependent name (because 'this' is
dependent on the template parameter). Removing 'i' from the template
results in A<int> which is a non-dependent name, so the compiler can
resolve the look-up to the base class.

There is more info here
http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/templates.html

--
sashan
http://sashang.orcon.net.nz/index.htm

---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]

Victor Bazarov · Guest

Paul Pedriana wrote: