Question

tree.h

template<typename Functor, char Operator>
class binary_operation : public node
{
// ... unimportant details ...

    unsigned evaluate() const;
    void print(std::ostream& os) const;
};

typedef binary_operation<std::plus<unsigned>, '+'> addition;
typedef binary_operation<std::multiplies<unsigned>, '*'> multiplication;
// ...

tree.cpp

template<typename Functor, char Operator>
unsigned binary_operation<Functor, Operator>::evaluate() const
{
    // ... unimportant details ...
}

template<typename Functor, char Operator>
void binary_operation<Functor, Operator>::print(std::ostream& os) const
{
    // ... unimportant details ...
}

template class binary_operation<std::plus<unsigned>, '+'>;
template class binary_operation<std::multiplies<unsigned>, '*'>;
// ...

As you can see, there is some code duplication between the typedefs in the header file and the explicit class template instantiations in the implementation file. Is there some way to get rid of the duplication that does not require putting “everything” in the header file as usual?

Answer 1

This is invalid and rejected by implementations because a typedef name is used in the elaborated type specifier

template class addition;

The following is invalid too, because the Standard says that there must be a simple template id contained in the elaborated type specifier. Comeau online and GCC both accept it, though.

template class addition::binary_operation;

You could apply a pervert workaround though to be fully Standards compliant

template<typename T> using alias = T;
template class alias<multiplication>::binary_operation;

At least I could not find it being invalid anymore on a quick glance over the spec.