Template for return-type

pumuckl

you could provide a helper template

teplate <typename T> 
struct SquaredType {
  typedef T ResultType; //normally T*T gives another T
};

template<>
struct SquaredType<3DVector> {
  typedef Scalar ResultType;  //Product of 2 3DVector gives a Scalar
};

template <typename T>
SquaredType<T>::ResultType Sqr(T const& x)
  {return x*x;}

now you only have to specialize SquaredType for types where the multiplication gives another type

SAn

Thanks. How to use __typeof technique?

I thinked for several days and thinked out the following solution:

class cVector
{
  ...
public:
  template<class C> struct tMult{};
  template<> struct tMult<cVector>{typedef double type;}; //The type of vector*vector
  template<> struct tMult<double>{typedef cVector type;}; //The type of vector*double 

  ...
};

Now, for all classes which have tMult struct I can do the following:

template<class A, class B> inline typename A::tMult<B>::type Multiply(A const &a, B const &b)
{
  return a*b;
}

P.S.: Why “typedef template is illegal” ?? Why I need to store type in template struct?

Konrad Rudolph

SAn schrieb:

TP.S.: Why “typedef template is illegal” ?? Why I need to store type in template struct?

Good question. It just is. Again, the next standard will have a solution to this problem (albeit not using the keyword 'typedef' but rather a templated 'using'). At the moment the best way to work around this restriction is by using meta functions – those 'template struct' constructs.

.filmor

http://www.boost.org/libs/utility/utility.htm#result_of

camper

Konrad Rudolph schrieb:

SAn schrieb:

TP.S.: Why “typedef template is illegal” ?? Why I need to store type in template struct?

Good question. It just is. Again, the next standard will have a solution to this problem (albeit not using the keyword 'typedef' but rather a templated 'using'). At the moment the best way to work around this restriction is by using meta functions – those 'template struct' constructs.

Though even with template aliases you need meta functions in their declarations if these aliases shall, depending on their template parameters, refer to template classes and ordinary types.

.filmor schrieb:

http://www.boost.org/libs/utility/utility.htm#result_of

That does not apply here because result_of requires a call-expression, using an operator does not necessarily result in a function call.

queer_boy

camper schrieb:

In the upcoming standard, this problem shall have an elegant solution:
template<typename T> constexpr sqr(T&& x) -> decltype( x * x ) { return x * x; }

for the sake of syntacical correctness:

template <typename T>
auto constexpr
sqrt (T&&x) -> decltype( x*x )
{
  return x*x;
}

queer_boy

SAn schrieb:

Thanks. How to use __typeof technique?

depends on how your compiler implements it.
possibly either this way:

template <class T>
typeof (T() + T())
//or that way (preferably):
typeof (*static_cast<T*>(0) + *static_cast<T*>(0))
foo (T const& a, T const& b)
{
   return a + b;
}

Werner Salomon

Was ist denn jetzt der Unterschied zwischen tr1::result_of und decltype ?

Fragt
Werner

queer_boy

decltype funktioniert immer, nicht nur mit funktionen.

int a(1), b(2), c(3);
decltype (a + b * c) d; //int d;
decltype (a = 5) e; //int& e; - operator= gibt eine referenz zurück

result_of wird in C++0x übrigens mittels decltype implementiert sein.

(btw. schreibe ich gerade für das magazin einen artikel über die neuen sprachfeatures von C++0x, also einfach bis nächste woche warten )

lord.hong

Hi SAn,

SAn schrieb:

template<class T, class TR> inline TR Sqr(T const &x)
{
  return x*x;
}
also does not work . Compiler error “Cannot deduce template parameter for TR” when trying to call such a function.

I think the order ist wrong.

template<class TR, class T> inline TR Sqr(T const &x)
{
  return x*x;
}

int main() 
{
  int i = 3;
  double d = Sqr<double>(i); 
}

If you want the return value it must be on the first place. Then you must explicit determine the first template and the second parameter is deduced by the compiler.

BR,
Markus