Reputation: 46657
I believe I've found a compiler bug in MSVC++ (present up to VS 2013). I want to check that it is indeed a bug before I report it.
The following code:
#include <map>
using std::map;
template <typename T>
class A
{
public:
typedef T StoredType;
};
template <typename T>
map<typename T::StoredType, int> foo()
{
map<typename T::StoredType, int> ret;
return ret;
}
template<>
map<char, int> foo<A<char>>()
{
map<char, int> ret;
return ret;
} // Error on this line
int main(int, char**)
{
return 0;
}
Produces a compile error:
1>d:\documents\visual studio 2010\projects\proj\proj\source1.cpp(24): error C2785: 'std::map<T::StoredType,int> foo(void)' and 'std::map<_Kty,_Ty> foo(void)' have different return types
1> with
1> [
1> _Kty=char,
1> _Ty=int
1> ]
1> d:\documents\visual studio 2010\projects\proj\proj\source1.cpp(13) : see declaration of 'foo'
1> d:\documents\visual studio 2010\projects\proj\proj\source1.cpp(20) : see declaration of 'foo'
1>d:\documents\visual studio 2010\projects\proj\proj\source1.cpp(24): error C2912: explicit specialization; 'std::map<_Kty,_Ty> foo<A<T>>(void)' is not a specialization of a function template
1> with
1> [
1> _Kty=char,
1> _Ty=int,
1> T=char
1> ]
However, it looks OK to me, and compiles fine on ideone.com. Is it a bug? Should it compile cleanly?
Upvotes: 11
Views: 455
Reputation: 11934
What is interesting that the same thing on a class specialization works fine:
#include <map>
using std::map;
template <typename T>
class A
{
public:
typedef T StoredType;
};
template <typename T>
struct Z
{
map<typename T::StoredType, int> foo()
{
map<T::StoredType, int> ret;
return ret;
} // Error on this line
};
template<>
struct Z<A<char>>
{
map<char, int> foo()
{
map<char, int> ret;
return ret;
}
};
int main(int, char**)
{
return 0;
}
If the map is defined in the template then it also seems fine:
#include <map>
using std::map;
template <typename T>
class A
{
public:
typedef map<T, int> MapType;
};
template <typename T>
typename T::MapType foo()
{
T::MapType ret;
return ret;
}
template<>
map<char, int> foo<A<char>>()
{
map<char, int> ret;
return ret;
}
int main(int, char**)
{
return 0;
}
So the assumption about the bug seems to be possible.
Upvotes: 1