https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=81043
Mike Detwiler <shazamancan at gmail dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |shazamancan at gmail dot com
--- Comment #2 from Mike Detwiler <shazamancan at gmail dot com> ---
I would like to share a temporary workaround that I have developed for this.
Consider the usual pattern for writing a partial specialization:
original decl:
template<ORIGINAL_PARAMS>
class my_class;
specialization:
template<SPECIAL_PARAMS>
class my_class<MODIFIED_PARAMS>;
If ORIGINAL_PARAMS, SPECIAL_PARAMS, and MODIFIED_PARAMS are all identical, then
it is an error, as it should be. Example of a true error:
template<typename T>
class my_class;
template<typename T> // <-- identical to ORIGINAL_PARAMS
class my_class<T>; // <-- T is unmodified, so MODIFIED_PARAMS is also identical
All three *PARAMS are identical, so it is an error. Example of a true
non-error:
template<typename T>
class my_class;
template<typename T> // <-- identical to ORIGINAL_PARAMS
class my_class<T*>; // <-- T is modified, so MODIFIED_PARAMS is NOT identical
Not all three *PARAMS are identical, so it is not an error. Another example of
a true non-error:
template <typename T> concept C = (sizeof(T) <= 4);
template<typename T>
class my_class;
template<C T> // <-- NOT identical to ORIGINAL_PARAMS (typename vs C)
class my_class<T>; // <-- T is unmodified, so MODIFIED_PARAMS is also identical
