Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [cdt-dev] CDT survey

Hi Nathan,


I've created a test file (it might be a bit cluttered, sorry). In the main method I put in some comments. Can you verify and suggest in which category these problems fall?

What should be done about the b20.test() linker problem? I know codan is extensible, but I have no clue how I personally can fix that quickly.


thx Michi



* test1.hpp


* Created on: 19 Jul 2013

* Author: michi



#ifndef TEST1_HPP_

#define TEST1_HPP_


#include <iostream>

#include <string>


struct AA {


void aa() {




void print() {

std::cout << "AA";





struct BB {


void bb() {




void print() {

std::cout << "BB";





struct CC {


void cc() {

std::cout << "CC";





template<int _Switch_>

struct B: public std::conditional<_Switch_ >= 10, AA, BB>::type {


void test();





struct B<5> : public AA, public CC {




int main() {

B<0> b0; // Type Hierarchy not resolved

B<5> b5; // open declaration does not point to specialization; Type Hierarchy not resolved (again no specialization)

B<20> b20; // Type Hierarchy not resolved // code completion works - uses proper conditional; // code completion works - uses specialization

b20.test(); // this is off topic, but I think it should generate a warning (linker problem) - unnoticed when building a library

b20.aa(); // code completion works - uses proper conditional



#endif /* TEST1_HPP_ */

On Thursday 18 Jul 2013 19:29:12 Nathan Ridge wrote:

> >> How about "support for C++11/C++14 language features"?

> > +1000

> > evaluating enable_if<..> et al. would be such a boon

> If by evaluating you mean performing overload resolutioncorrectly in the presence of enable_if, that should alreadywork. If it doesn't, please file bugs and I will fix them.

> Thanks,Nate



Back to the top