🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4g2aj2$bko@ugress.uib.no>,
Igor Boukanov <boukanov@kvark.fi.uib.no> wrote:
>So I suggest to let template namespaces. In this case it will be possible 
>to write something like this:
[Examples of namespace templates removed]

This raises immediately the following questions:

template <class T> namespace { // an unnamed namespace template - allowed?
  int i; // how many copies of this will be in the program?
                // what's the syntax for accessing the variable?
                // i<T> ?  <T>::i ?
  typedef vector<T>::iterator vector_iterator;  // is this the same
                                                // as a typedef template?
}
template <class T> namespace X { int f(); }

template <class T> using X<T>::f(); // Allowed?
template <class T> using namespace X<T>; // Allowed?

[points to justify namespace templates removed]
>  3. It makes C++  easy to study, because somebody will have to know only 
>the general idea about templates and how to apply them to any C++ elements
>(function, class, namespase,...).  

This would only be true if also typedef templates and union templates
were introduced too.
-- 
   Esa Pulkkinen                        | C++ programmers do it virtually
   E-Mail:  esap@cs.tut.fi              | everywhere with a class, resulting
   WWW   :  http://www.cs.tut.fi/~esap/ | in multiple inheritance.
---
[ To submit articles: Try just posting with your newsreader.  If that fails,
                      use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html
  Policy: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std.c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu 
]