Search Results

Search found 3563 results on 143 pages for 'templates'.

Page 36/143 | < Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >

  • Why do bind1st and bind2nd require constant function objects?

    - by rlbond
    So, I was writing a C++ program which would allow me to take control of the entire world. I was all done writing the final translation unit, but I got an error: error C3848: expression having type 'const `anonymous-namespace'::ElementAccumulator<T,BinaryFunction>' would lose some const-volatile qualifiers in order to call 'void `anonymous-namespace'::ElementAccumulator<T,BinaryFunction>::operator ()(const point::Point &,const int &)' with [ T=SideCounter, BinaryFunction=std::plus<int> ] c:\program files (x86)\microsoft visual studio 9.0\vc\include\functional(324) : while compiling class template member function 'void std::binder2nd<_Fn2>::operator ()(point::Point &) const' with [ _Fn2=`anonymous-namespace'::ElementAccumulator<SideCounter,std::plus<int>> ] c:\users\****\documents\visual studio 2008\projects\TAKE_OVER_THE_WORLD\grid_divider.cpp(361) : see reference to class template instantiation 'std::binder2nd<_Fn2>' being compiled with [ _Fn2=`anonymous-namespace'::ElementAccumulator<SideCounter,std::plus<int>> ] I looked in the specifications of binder2nd and there it was: it took a const AdaptibleBinaryFunction. So, not a big deal, I thought. I just used boost::bind instead, right? Wrong! Now my take-over-the-world program takes too long to compile (bind is used inside a template which is instantiated quite a lot)! At this rate, my nemesis is going to take over the world first! I can't let that happen -- he uses Java! So can someone tell me why this design decision was made? It seems like an odd decision. I guess I'll have to make some of the elements of my class mutable for now...

    Read the article

  • Create hyperlink in django template of object that has a space

    - by Ed
    I am trying to create a dynamic hyperlink that depends on a value passed from a function: {% for item in field_list %} <a href={% url index_view %}{{ item }}/> {{ item }} </a> <br> {% endfor %} The problem is that one of the items in field_list is "Hockey Player". The link for some reason is dropping everything after the space, so it creates the hyperlink on the entire "Hockey Player", but the address is http://126.0.0.1:8000/Hockey How can I get it to go to http://126.0.0.1:8000/Hockey Player/ instead?

    Read the article

  • C++ explicit template specialization of templated constructor of templated class

    - by Victor Liu
    I have a class like template <class T> struct A{ template <class U> A(U u); }; I would like to write an explicit specialization of this for a declaration like A<int>::A(float); In the following test code, if I comment out the specialization, it compiles with g++. Otherwise, it says I have the wrong number of template parameters: #include <iostream> template <class T> struct A{ template <class U> A(T t, U *u){ *u += U(t); } }; template <> template <> A<int>::A<int,float>(int t, float *u){ *u += U(2*t); } int main(){ float f = 0; int i = 1; A<int>(i, &f); std::cout << f << std::endl; return 0; }

    Read the article

  • How do you add and use just the Django version 1.2.1 template?

    - by Brian
    Thanks for the help. Currently I import in gae: from google.appengine.ext.webapp import template then use this to render: self.response.out.write(template.render('tPage1.htm', templateInfo )) I believe the template that Google supplied for Django templete is version 0.96. How do I setup and import the newer version of only the Django template version 1.2.1? Brian

    Read the article

  • templete class c++

    - by inna karpasas
    hi! i try to design a templete for my universty project. i wrote the follwing cod: #ifndef _LinkedList_H_ #define _LinkedList_H_ #include "Link.h" #include <ostream> template <class L>//error one class LinkedList { private: Link<L> *pm_head; Link<L> * pm_tail; int m_numOfElements; Link<L>* FindLink(L * dataToFind); public: LinkedList(); ~LinkedList(); int GetNumOfElements(){return m_numOfElements;} bool Add( L * data); L *FindData(L * data); template <class L> friend ostream & operator<<(ostream& os,const LinkedList<L> listToprint);//error two L* GetDataOnTop(); bool RemoveFromHead(); L* Remove(L * toRemove); this templete uses the link class templete #ifndef _Link_H_ #define _Link_H_ template <class T>//error 3 class Link { private: T* m_data; Link* m_next; Link* m_prev; public: Link(T* data); ~Link(void); bool Link::operator ==(const Link& other)const; /*getters*/ Link* GetNext()const {return m_next;} Link* GetPrev()const {return m_prev;} T* GetData()const {return m_data;} //setters void SetNext(Link* next) {m_next = next;} void SetPrev(Link* prev) {m_prev = prev;} void SetData(T* data) {m_data = data;} }; error one: shadows template parm class L' error two:declaration ofclass L' error three: shadows template parm `class T' i dont understand what is the problem. i can relly usr your help thank you :)

    Read the article

  • Array of templated structs

    - by Jakub Mertlik
    I have structs templated by int derived from a Base struct. struct Base { int i; double d; }; template< int N > struct Derv : base { static const int mN = N; }; I need to make an array of Derv< N where N can vary for each struct in that array. I know C/C++ does not allow arrays of objects of different types, but is there a way around this? I was thinking of separating the type information somehow (hints like pointers to Base struct or usage of union spring to my mind, but with all of these I don't know how to store the type information of each array element for usage DURING COMPILE TIME). As you can see, the memory pattern of each Derv< N is the same. I need to access the type of each array element for template specialization later in my code. The general aim of this all is to have a compile-time dispatch mechanism without the need to do a runtime "type switch" somewhere in the code. Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Is this call to a function object inlined?

    - by dehmann
    In the following code, Foo::add calls a function via a function object: struct Plus { inline int operator()(int x, int y) const { return x + y; } }; template<class Fct> struct Foo { Fct fct; Foo(Fct f) : fct(f) {} inline int add(int x, int y) { return fct(x,y); // same efficiency adding directly? } }; Is this the same efficiency as calling x+y directly in Foo::add? In other words, does the compiler typically directly replace fct(x,y) with the actual call, inlining the code, when compiling with optimizations enabled?

    Read the article

  • In the following implementation of static_strlen, why are the & and parentheses around str necessary

    - by Ben
    If I change the type to const char str[Len], I get the following error: error: no matching function for call to ‘static_strlen(const char [5])’ Am I correct that static_strlen expects an array of const char references? My understanding is that arrays are passed as pointers anyway, so what need is there for the elements to be references? Or is that interpretation completely off-the-mark? #include <iostream> template <size_t Len> size_t static_strlen(const char (&str)[Len]) { return Len - 1; } int main() { std::cout << static_strlen("oyez") << std::endl; return 0; }

    Read the article

  • How do I define a template class and divide it into multiple files?

    - by hkBattousai
    I have written a simple template class for test purpose. It compiles without any errors, but when I try to use it in main(), it give some linker errors. main.cpp #include <iostream> #include "MyNumber.h" int wmain(int argc, wchar_t * argv[]) { MyNumber<float> num; num.SetValue(3.14); std::cout << "My number is " << num.GetValue() << "." << std::endl; system("pause"); return 0; } MyNumber.h #pragma once template <class T> class MyNumber { public: MyNumber(); ~MyNumber(); void SetValue(T val); T GetValue(); private: T m_Number; }; MyNumber.cpp #include "MyNumber.h" template <class T> MyNumber<T>::MyNumber() { m_Number = static_cast<T>(0); } template <class T> MyNumber<T>::~MyNumber() { } template <class T> void MyNumber<T>::SetValue(T val) { m_Number = val; } template <class T> T MyNumber<T>::GetValue() { return m_Number; } When I build this code, I get the following linker errors: Error 7 Console Demo C:\Development\IDE\Visual Studio 2010\SAVE\Grand Solution\X64\Debug\Console Demo.exe 1 error LNK1120: 4 unresolved externals Error 3 Console Demo C:\Development\IDE\Visual Studio 2010\SAVE\Grand Solution\Console Demo\main.obj error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "public: __cdecl MyNumber::~MyNumber(void)" (??1?$MyNumber@M@@QEAA@XZ) referenced in function wmain Error 6 Console Demo C:\Development\IDE\Visual Studio 2010\SAVE\Grand Solution\Console Demo\main.obj error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "public: __cdecl MyNumber::MyNumber(void)" (??0?$MyNumber@M@@QEAA@XZ) referenced in function wmain Error 4 Console Demo C:\Development\IDE\Visual Studio 2010\SAVE\Grand Solution\Console Demo\main.obj error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "public: float __cdecl MyNumber::GetValue(void)" (?GetValue@?$MyNumber@M@@QEAAMXZ) referenced in function wmain Error 5 Console Demo C:\Development\IDE\Visual Studio 2010\SAVE\Grand Solution\Console Demo\main.obj error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol "public: void __cdecl MyNumber::SetValue(float)" (?SetValue@?$MyNumber@M@@QEAAXM@Z) referenced in function wmain But, if I leave main() empty, I don't get any linker errors. What is wrong with my template class? What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • C++ adding friend to a template class in order to typecast

    - by user1835359
    I'm currently reading "Effective C++" and there is a chapter that contains code similiar to this: template <typename T> class Num { public: Num(int n) { ... } }; template <typename T> Num<T> operator*(const Num<T>& lhs, const Num<T>& rhs) { ... } Num<int> n = 5 * Num<int>(10); The book says that this won't work (and indeed it doesn't) because you can't expect the compiler to use implicit typecasting to specialize a template. As a soluting it is suggested to use the "friend" syntax to define the function inside the class. //It works template <typename T> class Num { public: Num(int n) { ... } friend Num operator*(const Num& lhs, const Num& rhs) { ... } }; Num<int> n = 5 * Num<int>(10); And the book suggests to use this friend-declaration thing whenever I need implicit conversion to a template class type. And it all seems to make sense. But why can't I get the same example working with a common function, not an operator? template <typename T> class Num { public: Num(int n) { ... } friend void doFoo(const Num& lhs) { ... } }; doFoo(5); This time the compiler complaints that he can't find any 'doFoo' at all. And if i declare the doFoo outside the class, i get the reasonable mismatched types error. Seems like the "friend ..." part is just being ignored. So is there a problem with my understanding? What is the difference between a function and an operator in this case?

    Read the article

  • I have made two template classes,could any one tell me if these things are useful?

    - by soul
    Recently i made two template classes,according to the book "Modern C++ design". I think these classes are useful but no one in my company agree with me,so could any one tell me if these things are useful? The first one is a parameter wrapper,it can package function paramters to a single dynamic object.It looks like TypeList in "Modern C++ design". You can use it like this: some place of your code: int i = 7; bool b = true; double d = 3.3; CParam *p1 = CreateParam(b,i); CParam *p2 = CreateParam(i,b,d); other place of your code: int i = 0; bool b = false; double d = 0.0; GetParam(p1,b,i); GetParam(p2,i,b,d); The second one is a generic callback wrapper,it has some special point compare to other wrappers: 1.This template class has a dynamic base class,which let you use a single type object represent all wrapper objects. 2.It can wrap the callback together with it's parameters,you can excute the callback sometimes later with the parameters. You can use it like this: somewhere of your code: void Test1(int i) { } void Test2(bool b,int i) { } CallbackFunc * p1 = CreateCallback(Test1,3); CallbackFunc * p2 = CreateCallback(Test2,false,99); otherwhere of your code: p1->Excute(); p2->Excute(); Here is a part of the codes: parameter wrapper: class NullType; struct CParam { virtual ~CParam(){} }; template<class T1,class T2> struct CParam2 : public CParam { CParam2(T1 &t1,T2 &t2):v1(t1),v2(t2){} CParam2(){} T1 v1; T2 v2; }; template<class T1> struct CParam2<T1,NullType> : public CParam { CParam2(T1 &t1):v1(t1){} CParam2(){} T1 v1; }; template<class T1> CParam * CreateParam(T1 t1) { return (new CParam2<T1,NullType>(t1)); } template<class T1,class T2> CParam * CreateParam(T1 t1,T2 t2) { return (new CParam2<T1,T2>(t1,t2)); } template<class T1,class T2,class T3> CParam * CreateParam(T1 t1,T2 t2,T3 t3) { CParam2<T2,T3> t(t2,t3); return new CParam2<T1,CParam2<T2,T3> >(t1,t); } template<class T1> void GetParam(CParam *p,T1 &t1) { PARAM1(T1)* p2 = dynamic_cast<CParam2<T1,NullType>*>(p); t1 = p2->v1; } callback wrapper: #define PARAM1(T1) CParam2<T1,NullType> #define PARAM2(T1,T2) CParam2<T1,T2> #define PARAM3(T1,T2,T3) CParam2<T1,CParam2<T2,T3> > class CallbackFunc { public: virtual ~CallbackFunc(){} virtual void Excute(void){} }; template<class T> class CallbackFunc2 : public CallbackFunc { public: CallbackFunc2():m_b(false){} CallbackFunc2(T &t):m_t(t),m_b(true){} T m_t; bool m_b; }; template<class M,class T> class StaticCallbackFunc : public CallbackFunc2<T> { public: StaticCallbackFunc(M m):m_m(m){} StaticCallbackFunc(M m,T t):CallbackFunc2<T>(t),m_m(m){} virtual void Excute(void){assert(CallbackFunc2<T>::m_b);CallMethod(CallbackFunc2<T>::m_t);} private: template<class T1> void CallMethod(PARAM1(T1) &t){m_m(t.v1);} template<class T1,class T2> void CallMethod(PARAM2(T1,T2) &t){m_m(t.v1,t.v2);} template<class T1,class T2,class T3> void CallMethod(PARAM3(T1,T2,T3) &t){m_m(t.v1,t.v2.v1,t.v2.v2);} private: M m_m; }; template<class M> class StaticCallbackFunc<M,void> : public CallbackFunc { public: StaticCallbackFunc(M method):m_m(method){} virtual void Excute(void){m_m();} private: M m_m; }; template<class C,class M,class T> class MemberCallbackFunc : public CallbackFunc2<T> { public: MemberCallbackFunc(C *pC,M m):m_pC(pC),m_m(m){} MemberCallbackFunc(C *pC,M m,T t):CallbackFunc2<T>(t),m_pC(pC),m_m(m){} virtual void Excute(void){assert(CallbackFunc2<T>::m_b);CallMethod(CallbackFunc2<T>::m_t);} template<class T1> void CallMethod(PARAM1(T1) &t){(m_pC->*m_m)(t.v1);} template<class T1,class T2> void CallMethod(PARAM2(T1,T2) &t){(m_pC->*m_m)(t.v1,t.v2);} template<class T1,class T2,class T3> void CallMethod(PARAM3(T1,T2,T3) &t){(m_pC->*m_m)(t.v1,t.v2.v1,t.v2.v2);} private: C *m_pC; M m_m; }; template<class T1> CallbackFunc *CreateCallback(CallbackFunc *p,T1 t1) { CParam2<T1,NullType> t(t1); return new StaticCallbackFunc<CallbackFunc *,CParam2<T1,NullType> >(p,t); } template<class C,class T1> CallbackFunc *CreateCallback(C *pC,void(C::*pF)(T1),T1 t1) { CParam2<T1,NullType>t(t1); return new MemberCallbackFunc<C,void(C::*)(T1),CParam2<T1,NullType> >(pC,pF,t); } template<class T1> CParam2<T1,NullType> CreateCallbackParam(T1 t1) { return CParam2<T1,NullType>(t1); } template<class T1> void ExcuteCallback(CallbackFunc *p,T1 t1) { CallbackFunc2<CParam2<T1,NullType> > *p2 = dynamic_cast<CallbackFunc2<CParam2<T1,NullType> > *>(p); p2->m_t.v1 = t1; p2->m_b = true; p->Excute(); }

    Read the article

  • C++ MPL or_, and_ implementations

    - by KRao
    Hi, I am trying to read the boost headers to figure out how they managed to implement the or_<...> and and_<...> metafunctions so that: 1) They can have an arbitrary number of arguments (ok, say up to 5 arguments) 2) They have short circuit behavior, for example: or_<false_,true_,...> does not instantiate whatever is after true_ (so it can also be declared but not defined) Unfortunately the pre-processor metaprogramming is making my task impossible for me :P Thank you in advance for any help/suggestion.

    Read the article

  • Using Page anchors on Google AppEngine?

    - by codingJoe
    I would like to have AppEngine render an html page that auto scrolls to an html anchor point. I'm not how and where to put the that type of instruction. template_values = { 'foo' : 'foo', 'bar': 'bar', 'anchor' : '#MyPageAnchor' # ?? Something like this... } path = os.path.join(os.path.dirname(__file__), fileName) self.response.out.write(template.render(path, template_values)) Is this possible? How do I accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • Best way to manage a header navigation menu from within a template?

    - by Stefan Kendall
    I'm looking to put navigation in my GSP template, and I would like to set the active class on the navigation elements for each respective page. What's the best way to do this? I have several .gsp views merging with a single template that looks like this: <div id="bd" role="main"> <div role="navigation" class="yui-g"> <ul id="nav"><a href="index.gsp"><li class="active">Home</li></a><a href = "products.gsp"><li>Products</li></a><a href = "contacts.gsp"><li>Contact</li></a></ul> </div> <g:layoutBody/> </div>

    Read the article

  • C++ -- typedef "inside" template arguments?

    - by redmoskito
    Imagine I have a template function like this: template<Iterator> void myfunc(Iterator a, Iterator::value_type b) { ... } Is there a way to declare a typedef for Iterator::valuetype that I can use in the function signature? For example: template< typename Iterator, typedef Iterator::value_type type> void myfunc(Iterator a, type b) { ... } Thus far, I've resorted to using default template arguments and Boost concept checking to ensure the default is always used: template< typename Iterator, typename type = Iterator::value_type > void myfunc(Iterator a, type b) { BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT(( boost::type_traits::is_same< typename Iterator::value_type, type >::value )); ... } ...but it would be nice if there was support in the language for this type of thing.

    Read the article

  • Class template specializations with shared functionality

    - by Thomas
    I'm writing a simple maths library with a template vector type: template<typename T, size_t N> class Vector { public: Vector<T, N> &operator+=(Vector<T, N> const &other); // ... more operators, functions ... }; Now I want some additional functionality specifically for some of these. Let's say I want functions x() and y() on Vector<T, 2> to access particular coordinates. I could create a partial specialization for this: template<typename T> class Vector<T, 3> { public: Vector<T, 3> &operator+=(Vector<T, 3> const &other); // ... and again all the operators and functions ... T x() const; T y() const; }; But now I'm repeating everything that already existed in the generic template. I could also use inheritance. Renaming the generic template to VectorBase, I could do this: template<typename T, size_t N> class Vector : public VectorBase<T, N> { }; template<typename T> class Vector<T, 3> : public VectorBase<T, 3> { public: T x() const; T y() const; }; However, now the problem is that all operators are defined on VectorBase, so they return VectorBase instances. These cannot be assigned to Vector variables: Vector<float, 3> v; Vector<float, 3> w; w = 5 * v; // error: no conversion from VectorBase<float, 3> to Vector<float, 3> I could give Vector an implicit conversion constructor to make this possible: template<typename T, size_t N> class Vector : public VectorBase<T, N> { public: Vector(VectorBase<T, N> const &other); }; However, now I'm converting from Vector to VectorBase and back again. Even though the types are the same in memory, and the compiler might optimize all this away, it feels clunky and I don't really like to have potential run-time overhead for what is essentially a compile-time problem. Is there any other way to solve this?

    Read the article

  • Problem Render backbone collection using Mustache template

    - by RameshVel
    I am quite new to backbone js and Mustache. I am trying to load the backbone collection (Object array) on page load from rails json object to save the extra call . I am having troubles rendering the backbone collection using mustache template. My model & collection are var Item = Backbone.Model.extend({ }); App.Collections.Items= Backbone.Collection.extend({ model: Item, url: '/items' }); and view App.Views.Index = Backbone.View.extend({ el : '#itemList', initialize: function() { this.render(); }, render: function() { $(this.el).html(Mustache.to_html(JST.item_template(),this.collection )); //var test = {name:"test",price:100}; //$(this.el).html(Mustache.to_html(JST.item_template(),test )); } }); In the above view render, i can able to render the single model (commented test obeject), but not the collections. I am totally struck here, i have tried with both underscore templating & mustache but no luck. And this is the Template <li> <div> <div style="float: left; width: 70px"> <a href="#"> <img class="thumbnail" src="http://placehold.it/60x60" alt=""> </a> </div> <div style="float: right; width: 292px"> <h4> {{name}} <span class="price">Rs {{price}}</span></h4> </div> </div> </li> and my object array kind of looks like this

    Read the article

  • c++ class member functions instatiated by traits

    - by Jive Dadson
    I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched stackoverflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state info was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (vc++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice?

    Read the article

  • noncopyable static const member class in template class

    - by Dukales
    I have a non-copyable (inherited from boost::noncopyable) class that I use as a custom namespace. Also, I have another class, that uses previous one, as shown here: #include <boost/utility.hpp> #include <cmath> template< typename F > struct custom_namespace : boost::noncopyable { F sqrt_of_half(F const & x) const { using std::sqrt; return sqrt(x / F(2.0L)); } // ... maybe others are not so dummy const/constexpr methods }; template< typename F > class custom_namespace_user { static ::custom_namespace< F > const custom_namespace_; public : F poisson() const { return custom_namespace_.sqrt_of_half(M_PI); } static F square_diagonal(F const & a) { return a * custom_namespace_.sqrt_of_half(1.0L); } }; template< typename F > ::custom_namespace< F > const custom_namespace_user< F >::custom_namespace_(); this code leads to the next error (even without instantiation): error: no 'const custom_namespace custom_namespace_user::custom_namespace_()' member function declared in class 'custom_namespace_user' The next way is not legitimate: template< typename F ::custom_namespace< F const custom_namespace_user< F ::custom_namespace_ = ::custom_namespace< F (); What should I do to declare this two classes (first as noncopyable static const member class of second)? Is this feaseble?

    Read the article

  • Is it ok to dynamic cast "this" as a return value?

    - by Panayiotis Karabassis
    This is more of a design question. I have a template class, and I want to add extra methods to it depending on the template type. To practice the DRY principle, I have come up with this pattern (definitions intentionally omitted): template <class T> class BaseVector: public boost::array<T, 3> { protected: BaseVector<T>(const T x, const T y, const T z); public: bool operator == (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> operator + (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> operator - (const Vector<T> &other) const; Vector<T> &operator += (const Vector<T> &other) { (*this)[0] += other[0]; (*this)[1] += other[1]; (*this)[2] += other[2]; return *dynamic_cast<Vector<T> * const>(this); } } template <class T> class Vector : public BaseVector<T> { public: Vector<T>(const T x, const T y, const T z) : BaseVector<T>(x, y, z) { } }; template <> class Vector<double> : public BaseVector<double> { public: Vector<double>(const double x, const double y, const double z); Vector<double>(const Vector<int> &other); double norm() const; }; I intend BaseVector to be nothing more than an implementation detail. This works, but I am concerned about operator+=. My question is: is the dynamic cast of the this pointer a code smell? Is there a better way to achieve what I am trying to do (avoid code duplication, and unnecessary casts in the user code)? Or am I safe since, the BaseVector constructor is private?

    Read the article

  • Overlapping template partial specialization when wanting an "override" case: how to avoid the error?

    - by user173342
    I'm dealing with a pretty simple template struct that has an enum value set by whether its 2 template parameters are the same type or not. template<typename T, typename U> struct is_same { enum { value = 0 }; }; template<typename T> struct is_same<T, T> { enum { value = 1 }; }; This is part of a library (Eigen), so I can't alter this design without breaking it. When value == 0, a static assert aborts compilation. So I have a special numerical templated class SpecialCase that can do ops with different specializations of itself. So I set up an override like this: template<typename T> struct SpecialCase { ... }; template<typename LT, typename RT> struct is_same<SpecialCase<LT>, SpecialCase<RT>> { enum { value = 1 }; }; However, this throws the error: more than one partial specialization matches the template argument list Now, I understand why. It's the case where LT == RT, which steps on the toes of is_same<T, T>. What I don't know is how to keep my SpecialCase override and get rid of the error. Is there a trick to get around this? edit: To clarify, I need all cases where LT != RT to also be considered the same (have value 1). Not just LT == RT.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >