Explicit specialization in non-namespace scope does not compile in GCC

by

This should be a GCC bug. Full specialization should be allowed in any scope, including in class definition.

According to CWG 727, [temp.expl.spec] paragraph 2 was changed from

(emphasis mine)

An explicit specialization shall be declared in a namespace enclosing the specialized template. An explicit specialization whose declarator-id or class-head-name is not qualified shall be declared in the nearest enclosing namespace of the template, or, if the namespace is inline (10.3.1 [namespace.def]), any namespace from its enclosing namespace set. Such a declaration may also be a definition. If the declaration is not a definition, the specialization may be defined later (10.3.1.2 [namespace.memdef]).

to

(emphasis mine)

An explicit specialization may be declared in any scope in which the corresponding primary template may be defined (10.3.1.2 [namespace.memdef], 12.2 [class.mem], 17.6.2 [temp.mem]).

It seems GCC fails to follow this.

EDIT

I have reported the issue as Bug 85282.

More Related Contents:

  1. trap representation
  2. What exactly is the “immediate context” mentioned in the C++11 Standard for which SFINAE applies?
  3. Is it a conforming compiler extension to treat non-constexpr standard library functions as constexpr?
  4. C++ syntax for explicit specialization of a template function in a template class?
  5. Is the compiler allowed to optimize out heap memory allocations?
  6. “invalid use of incomplete type” error with partial template specialization
  7. explicit specialization of template class member function
  8. static_assert dependent on non-type template parameter (different behavior on gcc and clang)
  9. Template partial ordering – why does partial deduction succeed here
  10. Matching alias template as template argument
  11. Deducing first template argument with other template parameters defaulted
  12. Can class template constructors have a redundant template parameter list in c++20
  13. Class type non-type template parameter initialization does not compile
  14. Why is it not possible to overload class templates?
  15. Why does `int ;` compile fine in C, but not in C++?
  16. Can the point-of-instantiation be delayed until the end of the translation unit?
  17. C++ : friend declaration ‘declares a non-template function
  18. When instantiating a template, should members of its incomplete argument types be visible?
  19. Template instantiation details of GCC and MS compilers
  20. Is there a compiler bug exposed by my implementation of an is_complete type trait?
  21. Use of typename keyword with typedef and new
  22. gcc can compile a variadic template while clang cannot
  23. Why do the usual access control checking applies to names used to specify explicit instantiation when accessed through template parameters?
  24. Why does the template-id in “A=0” not compile without space because of the greater-or-equal-than operator “>=”?
  25. Calling an explicit constructor with a braced-init list: ambiguous or not?
  26. Injected class name compiler discrepancy
  27. Will I be able to declare a constexpr lambda inside a template parameter?
  28. Can I use the result of a C++17 captureless lambda constexpr conversion operator as a function pointer template non-type argument?
  29. Can we see the templates instantiated by the C++ compiler?
  30. Why don’t I need to specify “typename” before a dependent type in C++20?

Leave a Comment