A
Adam Nielsen
Hi everyone,
I've run into yet another quirk with templates, which IMHO is a somewhat
limiting feature of the language.
It seems that if you inherit multiple classes, and those classes have
two functions with the same name, this is an error - even when the
functions take different parameters, and they would happily exist as
overloaded functions if they were declared in the same class instead of
being inherited.
For example, this code won't compile:
class A { };
class B { };
template <typename T>
class Parent
{
public:
void doit(const T& t)
{
// do stuff with t
}
};
class Child: public Parent<A>, public Parent<B>
{
};
int main(void)
{
A a;
B b;
Child c;
c.doit(a); // call Parent<A>.doit()
c.doit(b); // call Parent<B>.doit()
return 0;
}
My understanding is that the compiler must find a unique name *before*
it looks at overloading, which means the above code fails because doit()
exists twice, even though each version takes a different parameter type.
I'm surprised this seems to be the intended behaviour (I thought it was
a bug in my compiler.) I can't think of any reason where this would be
desired behaviour!
I've come up with a workaround, which involves implementing a single
function in class Child which resolves the ambiguity:
class Child: public Parent<A>, public Parent<B>
{
public:
template <class T>
void doit2(const T& t)
{
this->Parent<T>::doit(t);
}
};
This fixes the problem, and avoids the need to manually specify the type
in main() where the users of my class aren't supposed to know about the
type (not to mention the typename it's very long and makes the code look
messy.)
Is this a correct way of dealing with this issue? Are there any better
ways?
Thanks,
Adam.
I've run into yet another quirk with templates, which IMHO is a somewhat
limiting feature of the language.
It seems that if you inherit multiple classes, and those classes have
two functions with the same name, this is an error - even when the
functions take different parameters, and they would happily exist as
overloaded functions if they were declared in the same class instead of
being inherited.
For example, this code won't compile:
class A { };
class B { };
template <typename T>
class Parent
{
public:
void doit(const T& t)
{
// do stuff with t
}
};
class Child: public Parent<A>, public Parent<B>
{
};
int main(void)
{
A a;
B b;
Child c;
c.doit(a); // call Parent<A>.doit()
c.doit(b); // call Parent<B>.doit()
return 0;
}
My understanding is that the compiler must find a unique name *before*
it looks at overloading, which means the above code fails because doit()
exists twice, even though each version takes a different parameter type.
I'm surprised this seems to be the intended behaviour (I thought it was
a bug in my compiler.) I can't think of any reason where this would be
desired behaviour!
I've come up with a workaround, which involves implementing a single
function in class Child which resolves the ambiguity:
class Child: public Parent<A>, public Parent<B>
{
public:
template <class T>
void doit2(const T& t)
{
this->Parent<T>::doit(t);
}
};
This fixes the problem, and avoids the need to manually specify the type
in main() where the users of my class aren't supposed to know about the
type (not to mention the typename it's very long and makes the code look
messy.)
Is this a correct way of dealing with this issue? Are there any better
ways?
Thanks,
Adam.