[note for moderators: I've sent this two weeks ago. It didn't appear at my
newsserver or through a search at dejanews, so I'm posting it again...]

Alexandre Oliva <oliva@dcc.unicamp.br> writes:

>In [temp.arg.explicit], it says:
>
>4 [Note:  because  the explicit template argument list follows the func-
>  tion template name, and because conversion member  function  templates
>  and  constructor  member function templates are called without using a
>  function name, there is no way to provide an explicit  template  argu-
>  ment list for these function templates.  ]
>This means all arguments to a constructor must be deducible; they
>cannot be specified explicitly.

Thanks for your answer, for some reasons I didn't notice that part!
Still, that leaves me with a bad feeling: a lack of immediate syntax is not
a reason to drop a useful feature. Syntactic matters can and should be
resolved when the underlying semantics is clear. Anybody here knows/remember
if there has been some discussion about that at ANSI/ISO meetings, and why
they have dropped explicit arguments in constructors?

Best Regards,
Carlo






+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Dr. Carlo Pescio        Email: pescio@acm.org                          |
| Eptacom Consulting             pescio@computer.org                     |
| Via B. Forte 2-3               pescio@programmers.net                  |
| 17100 Savona - ITALY           pescio@tin.it                           |
| Fax: +39-19-854761      Home:  http://www.programmers.net/artic/Pescio |
|                                http://space.tin.it/scienza/cpescio     |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: Try just posting with your
                newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
  Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu
]

Carlo Pescio writes:

> What is the current syntax for object definition when the
> constructor is a member template? I've been looking in the CD2, but
> couldn't find a clear answer.

In [temp.arg.explicit], it says:

4 [Note:  because  the explicit template argument list follows the func-
  tion template name, and because conversion member  function  templates
  and  constructor  member function templates are called without using a
  function name, there is no way to provide an explicit  template  argu-
  ment list for these function templates.  ]


This means all arguments to a constructor must be deducible; they
cannot be specified explicitly.

--
Alexandre Oliva
mailto:oliva@dcc.unicamp.br mailto:aoliva@acm.org
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil
---
[ 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         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]

What is the current syntax for object definition when the constructor is a
member template? I've been looking in the CD2, but couldn't find a clear answer.

In a class like that:

class C
  {
  public :
    template< int i > f() ;
  } ;

I can call f as follows (I guess; my compilers don't support the ".template"
syntax yet)

C c ;
c.template f< 10 >() ;

However, if my class is like:

class C
  {
  public :
    template< int i > C() ;
  } ;

What is the syntax to define objects of class C?

C< 10 > c ;  // ?? probably not, at least not in my compilers...

Thanks in advance,
Carlo








+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Dr. Carlo Pescio        Email: pescio@acm.org                          |
| Eptacom Consulting             pescio@computer.org                     |
| Via B. Forte 2-3               pescio@programmers.net                  |
| 17100 Savona - ITALY           pescio@tin.it                           |
| Fax: +39-19-854761      Home:  http://www.programmers.net/artic/Pescio |
|                                http://space.tin.it/scienza/cpescio     |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
---
[ 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         ]
[ FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html    ]
[ Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
[ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu                             ]