vgvassilev wrote:

@diseraluca, thanks for the thorough description. The point of these routines 
is to produce code that compiles. I am not sure if we change `Foo<int>::Bar` 
with `Foo<T>::Bar` it will compile.

> Due to the way the current codebase is set up, the chosen specialization is 
> `QFuture<void>` so that, for example, `QFuture::constBegin()` would be shown 
> to the user as returning a `QFuture<void>::const_iterator`. Nonetheless, 
> `QFuture<void>` is the only specialization that cannot have a 
> `const_iterator` and, as a consequence, doesn't have a `constBegin` method in 
> the first place.

I suspect that `QFuture<void>` is an explicit specialization. The intent of the 
code was to pick up an implicit specialization which follows much more closely 
the template pattern. Would selecting the first non-explicit instantiation fix 
your usecase?
cfe-commits mailing list

Reply via email to