Thread: Mixing implicit and explicit template arguments

gcc compiles this code, but I'm a little concerned it's not strictly legal C++:

Code:

#include <iostream>                                                                                                                                          
using namespace std;

template <typename OutType, typename InType>
OutType StaticCastWrapper(InType x) 
{
    return static_cast<OutType>(x);
}

int main()
{
    cout << StaticCastWrapper<int>(5.3) << endl;
   
    return 0; 
}

Anyone know?

as I understand it, as long as the compiler can tell what the template type is, it doesn't care if you specify it. in your case, you're telling it what the output type is, and it is able to infer what the input type is, so it compiles. you will certainly run into problems if you have 3 or more template parameters and explicitly specify the first and last, and try to have it infer the middle one(s).

To me the issue of having an explicit template argument after an implicit one seems only syntactic, just like default function parameters. You'd need to write something like:

Code:

#include <iostream>                                                                                                                                          
using namespace std;

// note the order of template arguments has been swapped
template <typename InType, typename OutType>
OutType StaticCastWrapper(InType x) 
{
    return static_cast<OutType>(x);
}

int main()
{
    cout << StaticCastWrapper<, int>(5.3) << endl;
   
    return 0; 
}

In the case of default parameters, I believe something analogous to the above is possible in excel vba, and I suppose it would work in C++, but I guess it's just ugly.

but in C++ that's not valid syntax. I don't know of any situation where you can have a comma after nothing and expect it to compile. default/implicit parameters must always follow explicit parameters, and no explicit parameters may follow default/implicit ones.

Of course. By "I suppose it would work in C++", I mean I suppose that the C++ language could fairly easily be changed to allow it.

Originally Posted by anon

But then, are there any motivating examples where you'd greatly benefit?

I doubt it.

I just had a thought though. If for some reason you wanted a templated function that would have its templates determined implicitly and wanted to use default parameters, you'd want template parameters corresponding to default parameters at the beginning of the template list despite having to be at the end of the function parameters list, which would be confusing.

Then again, combining implicit templates and default parameters would be pretty confusing regardless of parameter ordering problems, so you'd probably want to find some other way to solve whatever problem it would be.