template typename and class

template <typename T> is completely equivalent to template <class T> in every respect.

Note that this equivalency only holds for template parameters though. Anywhere else, typename and class have different meanings.

And yes, there is no semantic difference.

Evening Infinity! :)

Yes, I'm aware they're identical in functionality, but what I'm asking is why? What is the purpose of having two 'identifiers' for lack of a better word when both do the same job?

Thanks,
Uni

>> which one came first and then was kept for compatibility

If my memory serves me well, 'class' came first, and 'typename' was added later (in the context of template parameters). But I'd have to look that up to be sure.

What was the purpose though in them adding typename at a later date when it offers nothing more?

>> when it offers nothing more?

You might see it as being a bit more readable, because not all types used as a template parameter have to be classes. So, some might consider that 'typename' is more correct than 'class'.

Hm, how strange... Ok thank you. Thanks to you also Let_Me_Be for your input. :)

I think what Let_Me_Be said in http:#24827794 might be a more interesting answer, as it explains how C++ programmers have grown to use these two keywords in the case of template parameters, rather than why the C++ creators have added support for both.

Your friendly neighbourhood ZA is always happy to re-open this Q if there is any reason to do so. Just ask.

>>evilrix:
Hm, it seems to me very strange that something like the CPP standard which appears extremely strict would allow two things to be added that are semantically identical... Seems as though that would increase ambiguity rather than decrease it!

>>rather than why the C++ creators have added support for both.
That's what I was particularly interested in. ;)

>>Your friendly neighbourhood ZA is always happy to re-open this Q if there is any reason to do so. Just ask.
If Infinity thinks that the answer from Let_Me_Be is more appropriate so be it! Infinity? Your call. ;)

Uni

Hm, very well... :)

Evilrix, would you mind reopening the question as I'd like to split the points - seems I closed the question too early. (:

Cheers,
Uni

You have to look at the C++ language as a living thing, that is growing, and evolving. Sometimes, something is added to it, but very rarely, if ever, something is removed.


>> If Infinity thinks that the answer from Let_Me_Be is more appropriate so be it! Infinity? Your call. ;)

That's fine - it's your question ;) I just wanted to make sure that Let_Me_Be's replied didn't go by unnoticed :)

Thanks to all. :)

Uni.

:)

No problem :)