🔒 Locked

typename

Started by svpace Mar 4, 2003 at 1:20 PM 6 replies 1.1k views

Original Post

Mar 4, 2003 at 1:20 PM

Hi, what means the c++ keyword typename? for instance why the compiler complains about not using it in template typedefs or what is the diference between template class A{}; and template class A{};. Sorry if I''m wrong but as far as I can tell it seens a little useless.

Craazer

Mar 4, 2003 at 1:30 PM

quote:
Original post by svpace
Hi, what means the c++ keyword typename? for instance why the compiler complains about not using it in template typedefs or what is the diference between template class A{}; and template class A{};. Sorry if I''m wrong but as far as I can tell it seens a little useless.

The writer of my c++ book says that its the same.

Sneftel

Mar 4, 2003 at 1:31 PM

There''s no difference. A lot of people feel that "typename" is clearer, since the datatype need not be a class. A lot of other people feel it doesn''t matter. Do whatever floats your boat.

Oh, and use code and source tags on the forums, or your template definitions will disappear.

But... but that''s what HITLER would say!!

svpace

Mar 4, 2003 at 1:45 PM

Sorry by that. what I mean is what te diference between

  template<class T> class A{}; 
template<typename T> class A{};

So, typename has no reason to exist?

[edited by - svpace on March 4, 2003 2:49:46 PM]

LodeRunner

Mar 4, 2003 at 2:03 PM

typename is also used to define types that do not yet exist.

example:

    
template<class T> class X
{
   typename T::A var;
};

The class T is not known yet, but for this to compile correctly T must declare a type A. The 'typename' keyword tells the compiler to treat A as a type that will be defined in T. That allows you to create a variable 'var' as type T::A.

But in the case you mentioned:

        
template<class T> class X {/*...*/};
// and
template<typename T> class X {/*...*/};

'class T' and 'typename T' have the same meaning.

[edited by - LodeRunner on March 4, 2003 3:07:56 PM]

[edited by - LodeRunner on March 4, 2003 3:09:21 PM]

SiCrane

Mar 4, 2003 at 2:06 PM

There is no semantic difference between template<typename T> class A and template <class T> class A.

As for why it''s necessary inside templated code, consider the following:

  
class SomeClass {
  public:
    typedef int my_type;

    static my_type A;
};

int SomeClass::A;

template <typename T>
void func(typename T::my_type val) {
  T::A = val;
}

void some_func(void) {
  func<SomeClass>(5);
}

typename, in this case, is used to disambiguate between potential static variable references and type references. Basically it allows syntax to be checked during the template defintion rather than postponing it to instantiation, where the error messages will probably be much more cryptic.

svpace

Mar 4, 2003 at 2:18 PM

Thank you all, I think I got the idea.

LessBread

Mar 4, 2003 at 2:21 PM

Coincidentally, there''s an article on this very topic in the latest issue of Dr. Dobbs.

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.