Hi,
Heiko Wundram (Beenic) wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2007 16:42:29 schrieb Erich Dollansky:
Heiko Wundram (Beenic) wrote:
The problem is most probably related to the fact that the group of member
functions is only discriminated by return type (i.e., the template
parameter defines the return type), not by parameter (which could be
inferred).
if nothing got changed over the last years, it is not possible to do
this by definition.
When I needed this the last time, I used a enum as an additonal
parameter to achieve this.
I know, it is not perfect, but it leads to what I intended.
It should work here too. I know, it is not the prefect solution.
This is perfectly possible (nowadays? I've been using this for quite some time
now, but not in the "complexity" of the original mail). Take the following
code, for example, which compiles perfectly fine with gcc (and works, of
course):
"""
template <typename T, typename U>
T* newop(U test)
{
return new T(test);
}
wasn't your question that you have a class with several member functions
which would all be identical except of the return type?
It is not a problem outside a class, the problem comes when you want to
do this inside a class as you also would define a class with an - in
theory - unknown and unlimited number of member functions.
Erich
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
