Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6101849
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 23, 20262026-05-23T13:32:49+00:00 2026-05-23T13:32:49+00:00

template <typename Type> class Foo { Foo& Bar() { return *this; } }; Why

  • 0
template <typename Type>
class Foo
{
    Foo& Bar()
    {
        return *this;
    }
};

Why does this compile? Shouldn’t I have to specify the template parameter in the return type?

Foo<Type>& Bar()
{
     return *this;
}
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-23T13:32:49+00:00Added an answer on May 23, 2026 at 1:32 pm

    Foo<Type> is implied because the definition of Bar is within the definition of the class. If it were outside the class definition then you’d have to define it explicitly:

    template <typename Type>
    Foo<Type>& Foo<Type>::Bar()
    {
        return *this;
    }
    
    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Say I have this: template<typename T, int X> class foo { public: void set(const
I'm using Visual Studio 2008. I have this class: template <bool T1> class Foo
I have a class template <typename Iterator, typename Value> class Foo { public: Foo(const
I have the following code, which does some iterator arithmetic: template<class Iterator> void Foo(Iterator
I have a template class with both a type and a non-type template parameter.
Given class Foo template <typename T> class Foo { public: ...other methods.. void bar()
I have this template function: template <class P> double Determinant(const P & a, const
This in VS2010sp1 doesn't compile (it does compile with gcc 4.6 though): template<class T>
template<typename T, size_t n> size_t array_size(const T (&)[n]) { return n; } The part
The following code: template <typename S, typename T> struct foo { void bar(); };

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.