Re: Partial template class specialization?
"Qi" <no@no.no> wrote in message news:imujtd$kpu$3@speranza.aioe.org...
On 2011-3-30 1:18, MikeWhy wrote:
template <bool AutoReset, class T>
class TimerNode {
...
void OnTimer();
void DoCall();
};
//----------------------
template <class T>
void TimerNode<true, T>::OnTimer()
{
Reset();
DoCall();
}
//----------------------
template <class T>
void TimerNode<false, T>::OnTimer()
{ DoCall();
}
You can only partial specialize template.
You need to split TimerNode to two templates,
TimerNodeBase and TimerNode (inherited from TimerNodeBase).
Then put OnTimer in TimerNode and partial specialize TimerNode.
Does that actually change anything? I can separate the classes as you say,
but it still has the problem of partial specialization.
template <typename T> class TimerNodeBase {...};
template <bool AutoReset, typename T>
class TimerNode : public TimerNodeBase<T> {...}; // as before.
template <> void TimerNode<true>::OnTimer(){ ... } // problems, as before
template <> void TimerNode<false>::OnTimer(){ ... } // problems, as before
The full context is as follows. TimerNode is embedded in class
CallbackTimer, templatized on its calllback client. They pre-existed that
way with auto-reset being the default and only behavior. I wanted to add an
option to just unlink from the timer and not auto-reset, hence the new
template <typename T, bool AutoReset = true>
class CallbackTimer
{
...
struct TimerNode; // as before.
private:
DoubleLinkedList<TimerNode> timers;
};
It would be nice to have that supported simply in the language. I haven't
checked the more recent language proposed standard.