Reputation: 33579
I have the following reasonably simple function template:
template <class OrderedSetType, template<class> class SupersetType>
OrderedSetType f(const SupersetType<OrderedSetType>& superset)
{
return OrderedSetType();
}
It's called like this:
f(std::vector<std::string>());
And the compiler fails to deduce the template parameter. The diagnostic message isn't particularly helpful:
<source>: In function 'int main()':
<source>:12:33: error: no matching function for call to 'f(std::vector<std::__cxx11::basic_string<char> >)'
f(std::vector<std::string>());
^
<source>:5:16: note: candidate: template<class OrderedSetType, template<class> class SupersetType> OrderedSetType f(const SupersetType<OrderedSetType>&)
OrderedSetType f(const SupersetType<OrderedSetType>& superset)
^
<source>:5:16: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed:
<source>:12:33: note: template parameters of a template template argument are inconsistent with other deduced template arguments
f(std::vector<std::string>());
^
Why does the error occur? Happens with GCC 7.3 with -std=c++14
, does not happen with -std=c++17
. Which changes in the C++ 17 standard allowed for this code to compile? And can I make it compile for C++14?
Here's the live demo: https://godbolt.org/g/89BTzz
Specifying the template arguments explicitly doesn't help, by the way.
P. S. In the meantime, MSVC has no problems with this piece of code, but clang 5 and 6 cannot compile it even in C++17 mode. So either clang has a bug and fails to compile standard-compliant code, or GCC has a bug and successfully compiles code that it shouldn't (with -std=c++17
).
Upvotes: 1
Views: 999
Reputation: 172924
Which changes in the C++ 17 standard allowed for this code to compile?
You're declaring the template template parameter SupersetType
contaning only one template parameter, but the template template argument std::vector<std::string>
has two, i.e. std::string
and the default template argument std::allocator<string>
. Before C++17 they don't match and leads to error (then you have to make them match to solve the issue), since C++17 (CWG 150) it's allowed; i.e. the default template arguments are allowed for a template template argument to match a template template parameter with fewer template parameters.
template<class T> class A { /* ... */ }; template<class T, class U = T> class B { /* ... */ }; template <class ...Types> class C { /* ... */ }; template<template<class> class P> class X { /* ... */ }; X<A> xa; // OK X<B> xb; // OK in C++17 after CWG 150 // Error earlier: not an exact match X<C> xc; // OK in C++17 after CWG 150 // Error earlier: not an exact match
Upvotes: 3
Reputation: 66200
Try with
template <template <typename...> class SupersetType,
typename FirstT, typename ... OthersTs>
FirstT f (SupersetType<FirstT, OthersTs...> const & superset)
{ return FirstT{}; }
or also
template <template <typename...> class SupersetType, typename FirstT>
FirstT f (SupersetType<FirstT> const & superset)
{ return FirstT{}; }
The problem is that std::vector
doesn't accept only a type but two; the second is an allocator with a default value.
So you have to take in count this problem.
Obviously you can write f()
with a template-template parameter that accept only two types
template <template <typename, typename> class SupersetType,
typename FirstT, typename SecondT>
FirstT f (SupersetType<FirstT, SecondT> const & superset)
{ return FirstT{}; }
but if you use a template parameter that accept a variadic list of types, you have a more flexible f()
(that match more containers)
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 409176
While this doesn't provide an answer to your problem, it provide an alternative.
Remember that all standard container have a public type named value_type
. That means you could easily skip the template template and only have something like
template<typename ContainerT>
typename ContainerT::value_type f(ContainerT const& superset)
{
return typename ContainerT::value_type();
}
As long as your SupersetType
follows the standard containers with a value_type
member, it should work.
Upvotes: 1