Deducing first template argument with other template parameters defaulted

by

This is perfectly valid code, and gcc is right. The “feature” was introduced in C++17. It’s not really a feature because it is a defect report. MyDelegate matches the partial specialization of signature_traits, and so it should be taken as gcc correctly does. Note that it works because the second template parameter is defaulted.

The reason why clang doesn’t compile it is because that defect report has a defect :P. It doesn’t introduce the appropriate change in partial ordering, which is not really nice and makes previousy valid code ambiguous again.

It is expected to be fixed soon, but in the meanwhile, clang decided to “hide” the feature behind a flag, -frelaxed-template-template-args.

So, just compile with that flag enabled and you should be fine.

More Related Contents:

  1. Will I be able to declare a constexpr lambda inside a template parameter?
  2. Can I use the result of a C++17 captureless lambda constexpr conversion operator as a function pointer template non-type argument?
  3. reinterpret_cast creating a trivially default-constructible object
  4. Advantages of auto in template parameters in C++17
  5. What are template deduction guides and when should we use them?
  6. Metaprograming: Failure of Function Definition Defines a Separate Function
  7. Determine if a type is an STL container at compile time
  8. static_assert dependent on non-type template parameter (different behavior on gcc and clang)
  9. Is stateful metaprogramming ill-formed (yet)?
  10. Is a pointer with the right address and type still always a valid pointer since C++17?
  11. Template partial ordering – why does partial deduction succeed here
  12. C++17 class template partial deduction
  13. Matching alias template as template argument
  14. How is P0522R0 breaking code?
  15. How can I check if a type is an instantiation of a given class template? [duplicate]
  16. structured bindings: when something looks like a reference and behaves similarly to a reference, but it’s not a reference
  17. Can class template constructors have a redundant template parameter list in c++20
  18. Self-initialization of a static constexpr variable, is it well-formed?
  19. Can std::launder be used to convert an object pointer to its enclosing array pointer?
  20. Variadic deduction guide not taken by g++, taken by clang++ – who is correct?
  21. Pointer interconvertibility vs having the same address
  22. Can the point-of-instantiation be delayed until the end of the translation unit?
  23. When instantiating a template, should members of its incomplete argument types be visible?
  24. Is it allowed for a compiler to optimize away a local volatile variable?
  25. Compile-time constant id
  26. Why does the template-id in “A=0” not compile without space because of the greater-or-equal-than operator “>=”?
  27. Constexpr if alternative
  28. Optimize template replacement of a switch
  29. Directly write into char* buffer of std::string
  30. Why don’t I need to specify “typename” before a dependent type in C++20?

Leave a Comment