Below are two cases.
Case 1) Base->BaseIndirect->DerivedIndirect
Case 2) Base->Derived
In Case 2), I am able to call a template function of Base class using 3 notations. In Case 1), I am able to call template function of Base class using only 1 of those notations. And, I am NOT able to call template function of BaseIndirect using any notation :(. How do I fix this? Thanks.
struct Base {
template<bool R> inline void fbase(int k) {};
};
template<class ZZ> struct BaseIndirect : Base {
template<bool R> inline void fbaseIndirect(int k) {};
};
template<class ZZ>
struct DerivedIndirect : BaseIndirect<ZZ> {
DerivedIndirect() {
this->fbase<true>(5); // gives error, line 13
fbase<true>(5); // gives error, line 14
Base::fbase<true>(5); // WORKS, line 15
this->fbaseIndirect<true>(5); // gives error, line 16
fbaseIndirect<true>(5); // gives error, line 17
BaseIndirect<ZZ>::fbaseIndirect<true>(5); // gives error, line 18
}
};
template<class ZZ>
struct Derived : Base {
Derived() {
this->fbase<true>(5); // WORKS
fbase<true>(5); // WORKS
Base::fbase<true>(5); // WORKS
}
};
int main() {
Derived<int> der;
DerivedIndirect<int> derIndirect;
};
test.cpp: In constructor 'DerivedIndirect<ZZ>::DerivedIndirect()':
test.cpp:14: error: 'fbase' was not declared in this scope
test.cpp:17: error: 'fbaseIndirect' was not declared in this scope
test.cpp: In constructor 'DerivedIndirect<ZZ>::DerivedIndirect() [with ZZ = int]':
test.cpp:34: instantiated from herep
test.cpp:13: error: invalid operands of types '<unresolved overloaded function type>' and 'bool' to binary 'operator<'
test.cpp:16: error: invalid operands of types '<unresolved overloaded function type>' and 'bool' to binary 'operator<'
test.cpp:18: error: invalid operands of types '<unresolved overloaded function type>' and 'bool' to binary 'operator<'
The reason that many of these calls are failing is that there's a syntactic ambiguity you need to resolve using the single most obscure use of the template
keyword. Instead of writing
this->fbase<true>(5);
You need to write
this->template fbase<true>(5);
The reason is that without the template
keyword, the compiler parses this as
(((this->fbase) < true) > 5)
Which is nonsensical. The template keyword explicitly removes this ambiguity. Adding the template
keyword into the other cases you mentioned should fix those problems.
I'm actually not sure why this works for direct base classes, so if someone could answer that part of the question I'd love to see what the answer is.