From 4054576814034456811 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,297e1191220ad2df X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: sbnaran@fermi.ceg.uiuc.edu (Siemel Naran) Subject: Re: [Q] function member template in a template class Date: 1999/05/21 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 480618160 X-NNTP-Posting-Host: fermi.ceg.uiuc.edu Approved: stephen.clamage@sun.com (comp.std.c++) References: <37370316.85847397@ibm.net> X-UID: 0000000001 X-Status: $$$T Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Reply-To: sbnaran@KILL.uiuc.edu Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Originator: clamage@taumet On 10 May 99 16:05:31 GMT, Biju Thomas wrote: >Siemel Naran wrote: >> But I also think the presence of the word 'typename' there is >> harmless, so maybe the C++ grammar should be changed to allow it. On, >> the other hand, allowing a redundant 'typename' doesn't solve any big >> problems and might accidentally cause other problems. > >I think that a redundant 'typename' keyword will be harmless always. >What type of accidental problems can it cause? I'm thinking of the BNF grammar in Stroustrup's Appendix C. Allowing the redundant 'typename' might complicate these already complicated rules! -- ---------------------------------- Siemel B. Naran (sbnaran@uiuc.edu) ---------------------------------- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]