RE: [sv-ec] Mantis 1857 - extern method types for parameterized classes

> From: Gordon Vreugdenhil [mailto:gordonv@model.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2007 9:44 AM
> The second is exactly the situation I posted originally -- 
> when you parse C::T you don't know if you are referring to 
> "T" in the default specialization of C or whether you are 
> referring to the unspecialized name "T" in the parameterized 
> class for an extern method definition.
> 
> And, as I also posted previously, you could require C#()::T 
> in such situations but that would be irregular with the 
> semantics of a reference to "C" in other type contexts.
> 

I agree that this is a somewhat irregular, but all the proposals
are somewhat irregular.

In another context C::T would refer to the default value of T in 
class C, but C::get() in another context would be a static function 
call to the get() function in class C with default parameter values. 
We have no problem understanding that in the context of a function 
declaration C::get() means something different.

If we want some special syntax rather than 'C::T' I would be ok with
that, but I don't like 'C#()::T'. The C#() looks even more like C with
default parameter values. Maybe 'C#::T' would be better.   

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.