Question

I was recently trying to gauge my operator overloading/template abilities and as a small test, created the Container class below. While this code compiles fine and works correctly under MSVC 2008 (displays 11), both MinGW/GCC and Comeau choke on the operator+ overload. As I trust them more than MSVC, I’m trying to figure out what I’m doing wrong.

Here is the code:

#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

template <typename T>
class Container
{
      friend Container<T> operator+ <> (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs);
   public: void setobj(T ob);
     T getobj();
      private: T obj;
};

template <typename T>
void Container<T>::setobj(T ob)
{
   obj = ob;
}

template <typename T>
T Container<T>::getobj()
{
   return obj;
}

template <typename T>
Container<T> operator+ <> (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs)
{
      Container<T> temp;
      temp.obj = lhs.obj + rhs.obj;
      return temp;
}

int main()
{    
    Container<int> a, b;

 a.setobj(5);
    b.setobj(6);

 Container<int> c = a + b;

 cout << c.getobj() << endl;

    return 0;
}

This is the error Comeau gives:

Comeau C/C++ 4.3.10.1 (Oct  6 2008 11:28:09) for ONLINE_EVALUATION_BETA2
Copyright 1988-2008 Comeau Computing.  All rights reserved.
MODE:strict errors C++ C++0x_extensions

"ComeauTest.c", line 27: error: an explicit template argument list is not allowed
          on this declaration
  Container<T> operator+ <> (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs)
               ^

1 error detected in the compilation of "ComeauTest.c".

I’m having a hard time trying to get Comeau/MingGW to play ball, so that’s where I turn to you guys. It’s been a long time since my brain has melted this much under the weight of C++ syntax, so I feel a little embarrassed ;).

EDIT: Eliminated an (irrelevant) lvalue error listed in initial Comeau dump.

Answer 1

I found the solution thanks to this forum posting. Essentially, you need to have a function prototype before you can use ‘friend’ on it within the class, however you also need the class to be declared in order to properly define the function prototype. Therefore, the solution is to have two prototype definitons (of the function and the class) at the top. The following code compiles under all three compilers:

#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

//added lines below
template<typename T> class Container;
template<typename T> Container<T> operator+ (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs); 

template <typename T>
class Container
{
      friend Container<T> operator+ <> (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs);
      public: void setobj(T ob);
              T getobj();
      private: T obj;
};

template <typename T>
void Container<T>::setobj(T ob)
{
      obj = ob;
}

template <typename T>
T Container<T>::getobj()
{
      return obj;
}

template <typename T>
Container<T> operator+ (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs)
{
      Container<T> temp;
      temp.obj = lhs.obj + rhs.obj;
      return temp;
}

int main()
{    
    Container<int> a, b;

    a.setobj(5);
    b.setobj(6);

    Container<int> c = a + b;

    cout << c.getobj() << endl;

    return 0;
}