standard not clear about member function partial specialization

Discussion in 'C++' started by SainTiss, Dec 25, 2003.

  1. SainTiss

    SainTiss Guest

    Hi,

    I've been looking into the standard for a clear statement on whether partial
    specialization of member functions of class templates is allowed or not.

    14.7.3/4 says that explicit specialization of a member function is legal,
    but doesn't state that partial specialization is not.

    One might argue that the standard indicates that partial specialization
    implies a distinct template, and therefore defining a member function
    requires the specialized class to be defined as well (explicitly
    instantiated).
    However, I don't find that very clear in the standard...

    Did I just misinterpret some sections, or is this really somewhat blurry?

    Thanks,

    Hans
    SainTiss, Dec 25, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. SainTiss

    SainTiss Guest

    Sorry, this should have gone to comp.std.c++
    SainTiss, Dec 25, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Petre Iantu
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    352
    Petre Iantu
    Aug 17, 2003
  2. Thomas Maier-Komor

    partial member specialization

    Thomas Maier-Komor, Oct 19, 2004, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    2,543
    Thomas Maier-Komor
    Oct 19, 2004
  3. Levent
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    11,143
    Victor Bazarov
    May 10, 2005
  4. Kai-Uwe Bux
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    475
  5. puzzlecracker
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    286
    James Kanze
    Jan 29, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page