Re: template argument required

[Patrick Rammelt]

Larry I Smith wrote:

> 'class' should not be required.  In fact, it may
> confuse the issue (on some compilers).  Try:
>
>   A<T> & foo (X p) {
>     ...
>   }

Yes, that works too. Thanks again. Now I have three working and one 
non-working version:

Working:
class A<T>& foo (X p) { ... } // 1)
A<T>& foo (X p) {... }        // 2)
A& foo (X p) { ... }          // 3)

Not Working:
class A& foo (X p) { ... }    // 4)

So is it a gcc-bug? In my opinion 3) and 4) should not behave 
differently (I do not really understand why "class" confuses my new 
little gcc).

Ciao,
Patrick
--
Email see: http://user.cs.tu-berlin.de/~rammelt/mail.gif