C ++ - 引用类型的模板实例化 [英] C++ - template instantiation with reference type

问题描述

我听过一些关于参考文献问题和此解决方案的问题。我对C ++委员会术语不是很好，但我理解链接中的移至DR注释意味着这是符合标准的编译器应遵循的当前解释。

I've heard a little bit about reference-to-reference problem and this resolution. I'm not very good with C++ Committee terminology, but I understand the "Moved to DR" annotation in the link means that this is the current interpretation that standard-conforming compilers should adhere to.

我有这个示例代码，我不明白：

I have this sample code that I can't understand:

template <typename T>
struct C {
  void f(T&) { }
  void f(const T&) { }
};

int main() {
  C<int> x;        // OK
  C<int&> y;       // compile error: f cannot be overloaded
  C<const int&> z; // compile error: f cannot be overloaded
}

c $ c> C 情况：使用来自DR＃106的规则，我们得到具有相同签名f（const int&）的两个方法。我没有得到的是 C< int&> case：不应该生成与 C< int> / code>（至少根据Stroustrup的解决方案）？

I understand the error in C<const int&> case: using rules from DR #106 we get two methods with the same signature f(const int&). What I don't get is the C<int&> case: shouldn't it generate exactly the same code as C<int> (at least according to Stroustrup's resolution)?

推荐答案

DR仅表示缺陷报告我的知识，描述的分辨率还没有（还）达到标准。因此，我认为严格遵守C ++ 03实现不应该编译这段代码，因为它正在形成一个引用的引用。

DR only means "Defect Report", and to my knowledge, the described resolution hasn't made it (yet) to the standard. For this reason, I believe a strictly conforming C++03 implementation should not compile this code because of it is forming a reference to a reference.

关于此问题的不错的答案。

这篇关于C ++ - 引用类型的模板实例化的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！