Templates: Members Vs. non-members

[Dave]

Hello all,

Are the rules for templated member functions different in any way than the
rules for templated non-member functions?

How about templated member classes Vs. templated non-member classes?

Thanks,
Dave

 

[Victor Bazarov]

Are the rules for templated member functions different in any way than the
rules for templated non-member functions?

Rules? Different? I can't recall any, really.

How about templated member classes Vs. templated non-member classes?

Hmm... No.

Why do you ask? Have you run into a problem?

V

 

[Dave]

Rules? Different? I can't recall any, really.


Hmm... No.

Why do you ask? Have you run into a problem?

V

Nope. I'm just preparing a presentation and am checking multiple sources to
make sure I'm giving accurate information.

 

[tom_usenet]

Hello all,

Are the rules for templated member functions different in any way than the
rules for templated non-member functions?

Well, of course, since the rules for member functions are different
from the rules for non-member functions, in terms of overloading,
constness, declarations and definitions, etc.

How about templated member classes Vs. templated non-member classes?

You can't specialize a member template of a class template without
fully specializing the class template, but I'm not sure you'd call
that a difference.

When specifying member templates that are dependent names, you need to
use "template" to disambiguate. e.g. to call a template member
function specialization "foo" of a dependently typed object t you need
to do this:

t.template foo<int>();

Tom