I have worked around the problem. The HashTable methods now have __GCC__ code
that detects when the object has not had its constructor called, and
Performs the same initialization on-demand.
>From the lack of responses indicating otherwise, I suppose I will assume this
>is a bug in G++. Should that go into bugzilla?
Dr. Michael J. Gourlay
University of Central Florida / FIEA
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Gourlay
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2006 4:33 PM
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: too few template-parameter-lists with nested template
I've seen other posts asking a similar question, but the solution continues to
evade me.
I have a line of code that compiles and runs as designed with MSVC but not
under g++ 3.4.2 (mingw-special):
HashTable<Factory<AbstractProductUnitTest>::FactoryEntry>
Factory<AbstractProductUnitTest>::sFactoryTable ;
The following lines do compile (but see caveat below):
template <class EntryT> class
HashTable<Factory<AbstractProductUnitTest>::FactoryEntry>
Factory<AbstractProductUnitTest>::sFactoryTable ;
...or...
template <> class HashTable<Factory<AbstractProductUnitTest>::FactoryEntry>
Factory<AbstractProductUnitTest>::sFactoryTable ;
The resulting code, however, seems not to have called the constructor on
sFactoryTable by the time it gets used, which is well after "main" starts -
i.e. this is not a problem with order of execution of static constructors.
Here is some context for the code above:
template <class EntryT> class HashTable
{
...
protected:
LinkedList<EntryT> * mLists ;
...
} ;
template <class AbstractProductT> class Factory : public HashEntry
{
...
protected:
struct FactoryEntry : public HashEntry
{ // struct to associate a factory with a hash table key.
Factory<AbstractProductT> * mFactory ;
} ;
static HashTable<FactoryEntry> sFactoryTable ; // singleton list of
concrete factories associated with this abstract factory
} ;
I searched http://gcc.gnu.org/ and found several simpler variations where
people complained about initialization of static templated class members, the
solution to which was to prefix the class name with "template <>", but I found
no mention of a situation like that above, which involves nested templated
classes.
I apologize if this reflects my ignorance rather than a bug in the GNU C
compiler, and would appreciate having somebody explain how to make this work.
Thanks.
Michael J. Gourlay
