🚀 go-pugleaf

>>>>> "ML" == Mia Lahteenmaki <mlahteen@cs.Helsinki.FI> writes:
[...]
ML> template<class T> class Ref {...};
ML> //primary template
ML> template<class T1> class Collection {...};

ML> // How should I declare now the specialization ? Like this?
ML> template<class T1> class Collection<Ref<T> > {...};  

I think it should be:

	template<class T>
	class Collection<Ref<T> > // ...

Very few (if any) compilers support this form of partial
specialization yet.

	Daveed

[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]

>>>>> On 4 Dec 1995 16:30:04 GMT, mlahteen@cs.Helsinki.FI (Mia
Lahteenmaki) said:

    Mia> The WP draft (28 April,1995) describes class template
    Mia> specializations in 14.6 [temp.class.spec]. I would like to
    Mia> specialize collection class to use smart pointer (Ref)
    Mia> element type.  The typical template instantiation is
    Mia> 'Collection<Ref<C>>' where C is some class.

    Mia> template<class T> class Ref {...}; //primary template
    Mia> template<class T1> class Collection {...};

    Mia> // How should I declare now the specialization ? Like this?
    Mia> template<class T1> class Collection<Ref<T> > {...};

Check out 14.7 (temp.param). It might be of use to you. 

AFAIK (don't take my word for granted and pl correct me if I I'm
wrong), you could do it like this:

template <class T> class Ref { ... };
template <class T, template <class T> class RefType = Ref> class Collection { ... };

There is an example out there that does stuff like the above. 

None of the compilers I have access to understand this baroque syntax. 


-- 
Peace.... +<:-)

Anil


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]

mlahteen@cs.Helsinki.FI (Mia Lahteenmaki) (almost) wrote:

template<class T> class Ref {...}; 

template<class T1> class Collection {...};
  // primary template

template<class T1> class Collection<Ref<T> > {...};  
  // specialisation

---> is correct as you wrote it. However, I wouldn't
advise doing this particular specialisation!

It isn't necessary, your "Ref<T>" class(es) should do
all the work. You could consider a container adaptor
instead.

BTW: you CAN'T specialise standard library templates;
if you do you release your compiler from any obligation
to operate correctly. 

-- 
John Max Skaller               voice: 61-2-566-2189
81 Glebe Point Rd              fax:   61-2-660-0850
GLEBE NSW 2037                 email: maxtal@suphys.physics.oz.au
AUSTRALIA                      email: skaller@maxtal.com.au



[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]

In <4a4hc2$1qb@oznet03.ozemail.com.au> John Max Skaller 
<maxtal@suphys.physics.su.oz.au> writes:

>mlahteen@cs.Helsinki.FI (Mia Lahteenmaki) (almost) wrote:

>>template<class T> class Ref {...}; 

>>template<class T1> class Collection {...};
>>  // primary template

>>template<class T1> class Collection<Ref<T> > {...};  
>>  // specialisation

> ---> is correct as you wrote it. 

I'm sorry, I do not agree with you here (anymore).
After the answers from David Vandevoorde and Timo Holkeri and some
rethinking I agree with them that the correct form must be 

 template<class T> class Collection<Ref<T> > {...};


In <4a4hc2$1qb@oznet03.ozemail.com.au> John Max Skaller 
<maxtal@suphys.physics.su.oz.au> continues:

>... However, I wouldn't 
>advise doing this particular specialisation!

>It isn't necessary, your "Ref<T>" class(es) should do
>all the work. You could consider a container adaptor
>instead.

>BTW: you CAN'T specialise standard library templates;
>if you do you release your compiler from any obligation
>to operate correctly. 

>-- 
>John Max Skaller               voice: 61-2-566-2189
>81 Glebe Point Rd              fax:   61-2-660-0850
>GLEBE NSW 2037                 email: maxtal@suphys.physics.oz.au
>AUSTRALIA                      email: skaller@maxtal.com.au

And right you are ! 
I should have changed the type names or explain further why I'm doing 
these odd things. 
Here comes the explanation: I am not using STL or implementing collections
from the scratch. I am using commercial library having persistent-capable
collections that only accept pointer element types. I want to build 
an interface on top of this library to allow ODMG-93 standard compatible
use. In the ODMG-93 standard compatible use, the element types user
defines may be smart pointers (Ref<T>) in which case I must change the 
element type to Ref<T>*. In addition, I must take care that the smart 
pointer instance to be stored is persistent, if the collection is meant 
to be persistent. After I add the pointer to the element type, it is not
taken care automatically.

There has been some other suggestions of using template parameters
in this case. I thank you for reminding me this option. However, I 
consider class template specialization a more intuitive and suitable 
solution in this case. A collection type that has smart pointers as 
its element type is one special type of collections. 

BTW, does anyone know a compiler which implements class template
specialization already ?

 - Mia

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Mia Lahteenmaki                      University of Helsinki 
e-mail: mia.lahteenmaki@helsinki.fi  Department of Computer Science 
Tel   : +358 0 7084 4246             P.O. Box 26
Fax   : +358 0 7084 4441             FIN-00014 UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI
                                     FINLAND                
---------------------------------------------------------------------


---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]