Re: partial specialization
- From: "Jack Hanebach" <firstname@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 12:36:12 -0700
Victor Bazarov wrote:
template<>
struct A<double, int>
{
void foo() {}
};
and
template<>
void A<double, int>::foo() {}
(other than syntax, of course)?
The former is specialisation, the latter is a definition.
The former is specialization of A _and_ a definition of A::foo,
specializezed for double and int, the later is a definition of A::foo
specialized for double and int (and implicit specialization of A), yes.
Yet the effect of both is exactly the same...
--
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: partial specialization
- From: Victor Bazarov
- Re: partial specialization
- References:
- partial specialization
- From: Jack Hanebach
- Re: partial specialization
- From: Igor Tandetnik
- Re: partial specialization
- From: Jack Hanebach
- Re: partial specialization
- From: Victor Bazarov
- Re: partial specialization
- From: Jack Hanebach
- Re: partial specialization
- From: Victor Bazarov
- partial specialization
- Prev by Date: Re: partial specialization
- Next by Date: Re: partial specialization
- Previous by thread: Re: partial specialization
- Next by thread: Re: partial specialization
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|