Re: point of declaration regarding template aliases
pongba@gmail.com ha scritto:
Why should the following declaration fail:
using cell = pair<int, cell*>;
I mean, after all wasn't it just like:
struct cell
{
int val;
cell* next;
};
?
The rationale given in N1489 seems to me like a circular proof:
template<class T>
using List = std::pair<T, List<T>*>; // ill-formed
The reason is that std::pair<T, List<T>*>is not an existing type since
there is no declaration for List.
Paper N1489 is obsolete. The most recent revision of the proposal is
N2258 and says (added to 7.1.3/2 in the latest draft of the standard):
"A typedef-name can also be introduced by an alias-declaration. The
identifier following the using keyword becomes a typedef-name. It has
the same semantics as if it were introduced by the typedef specifier. In
particular, it does not define a new type and it cannot appear in the
type-id."
This statement seems defective to me. The problem here is the point of
declaration of cell in:
using cell = pair<int, cell*>;
If the statement had the same semantic as the typedef declaration
typedef pair<int, cell*> cell;
the code would be ill-formed because "cell" is undefined while parsing
the right hand side of "=". If this is the case, then the phrase "... it
cannot appear in the type-id" is pointless, because it can never occur.
However, if the point of declaration is just before "=", then the
statement would be no longer equivalent to the typedef:
typedef int T1;
typedef int T2;
void foo()
{
typedef std::pair<int, T1*> T1; // ok: T1 is pair<int, int*>
using T2 = std::pair<int, T2*>; // ill-formed
}
I believe the intent was to have this second interpretation. In this
case, it seems to me that: 1) a clarification about the point of
declaration should be added, 2) the "as-if a typedef" part might use
some rewording.
Notice that N2258 added this statement to 3.3.1/1: "The point of
declaration of a template alias immediately follows the identifier for
the alias being declared."
Why only "template" aliases are mentioned and not "generic" aliases?
As we are here, here's one more question, is the code
template <class T>
using cell = std::pair<int, cell<T>*>;
ill-formed or not? I could not find a statement as precise as 7.1.3/2
that says it's ill-formed and 3.3.1/1 makes me think it might be
well-formed.
I'm confused,
Ganesh
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]