🚀 go-pugleaf

In my opinion, the base class initialization is correct in version 3
but not in version 2 yet version 1 fails to compile.

VERSION 1
=========

template < int b >
class C {
     int B;
   public:
   C( int cc );
};

template < int b > C<b>::C( int cc ) {
  B = b * cc;
  printf( "%d\n", B );
}

class Foo : public C<7> {

    public:
	int X;

	Foo( int xx );
};

Foo::Foo( int xx )
 : C( 2 )
{
  X = xx;
}

void test( ) {

  Foo bar(123);

}

----------------------
junk.c: In method `Foo::Foo (int)':
junk.c:23: class `Foo' does not have any field named `C'
junk.c:24: too few arguments for constructor `C'
junk.c:24: in base initialization for class `Foo'
junk.c: In method `C<7>::C (int)':
junk.c:11: warning: implicit declaration of function `printf'


VERSION 2
=========

template < int b >
class C {
     int B;
   public:
   C( int cc );
};

template < int b > C<b>::C( int cc ) {
  B = b * cc;
  printf( "%d\n", B );
}

class Foo : public C<7> {

    public:
	int X;

	Foo( int xx );
};

Foo::Foo( int xx )
 : C<7>( 2 )
{
  X = xx;
}

void test( ) {

  Foo bar(123);

}

--------------------------
junk.c: In method `C<7>::C (int)':
junk.c:11: warning: implicit declaration of function `printf'

- Philippe F. Bertrand                          pfbertrand@watcgl.uwaterloo.ca 
Computer Graphics Lab, Department of Computer Science,
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada  N2L 3G1