• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 351
  • Last Modified:

Why is this template class changing the output of General and not OldVars?

I am compiling the below code using Microsoft VC++ 6.0. But the setall function below is only changing General::a and not OldVars::a. Why? And what should I do so that I can change both General::a and OldVars::a?

#include <fstream.h>

class d{};
class general {};
class oldvar {};
class newvar {};

template <class T> class test
{
      public:
            static int a;
};

int test<general>::a = 321;
int test<oldvar>::a = 420;
int test<newvar>::a = 123;

typedef test<general> General;
typedef test<oldvar> OldVar;
typedef test<newvar> NewVar;

template <typename T>
void set(int a)
{
      T::a=a;
}

void setall(int x, int y)
{
      set<OldVar>(y);
      set<General>(x);
}

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
      cout << "General " << General::a << endl;
      cout << "OldVar " << OldVar::a << endl;
      cout << "NewVar " << NewVar::a << endl << endl;
      setall(5,10);
      cout << "General " << General::a << endl;
      cout << "OldVar " << OldVar::a << endl;
      cout << "NewVar " << NewVar::a << endl;
      return 0;
}
0
shuklasunil
Asked:
shuklasunil
  • 3
  • 2
1 Solution
 
shuklasunilAuthor Commented:
To add, strangely it looks like "set<OldVar>(y)" doesn’t calls "set<OldVar>(int)" function but calls set<General>(x). Therefore its only changing General::a.
Its still not clear why it behaving this way. I confirmed this by reversing the or of "set" function then it changes OldVar::a. :(
0
 
colmccCommented:
Interesting.  I get similar results using Borland.  Except, with Borland it's OldVar, not General, that gets changed.

I've got some idea what is going on.  I think it is to do with template instantiation.  It would appear that because the signature of the set() function does not contain T, only one instantiation is being generated.  All calls of set<Type>(int) are actually calling the same function.

I got the desired results by adding a dummy 2nd parameter -

template <typename T>
void set(int a, T* dummy)
{...}

and calling like this -
set<OldVar>(y, new OldVar);
set<General>(x, new General);

That's hardly ideal though!

It may be possible to force the compiler to generate all the desired functions.  I tried adding the following lines to force explicit instantiation -

template void set<General>(int);
template void set<Oldvar>(int);
template void set<newvar>(int);

but Borland does not seem to support this syntax.  You could try that in MSVC++.  However, it may be that you absolutely must refer to T in the function signature.

Regards,
Colin


0
 
shuklasunilAuthor Commented:
But why is it behaving like this. Is this expected/right behavior? If not does it mean there is a flaw in our compilers.
0
 
colmccCommented:
I'm not sure.  I think it might be undefined.  I'd be interested to here if the explicit instantiation trick works for you.  The C++ standard seems to imply that it should.
0
 
shuklasunilAuthor Commented:
No it didn't worked. But your work around solved the problem thanks.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

Join & Write a Comment

Featured Post

Introducing Cloud Class® training courses

Tech changes fast. You can learn faster. That’s why we’re bringing professional training courses to Experts Exchange. With a subscription, you can access all the Cloud Class® courses to expand your education, prep for certifications, and get top-notch instructions.

  • 3
  • 2
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now