Hmm that's good advice. I can't seem to get it to compile though.
Here's the original set of code
template <typename T>
class SelfOrganizingList: public list<T>
{
public:
bool contains(const T& t)
{
typename list<T>::iterator it = find(this->begin(), this->end(), t);
if (it == this->end()) return false;
if (it != this->begin())
{ erase(it);
push_front(t);
}
return true;
}
};
Using your advice, I changed the typename list code(line 7) to
typedef list<T> super;
using super::size;
using super::empty;
typedef typename super::iterator it;
However it says that super is not a namespace (strlist.cpp:14: error:
‘SelfOrganizingList<T>::contains(const T&)::super’ is not a namespace)
Any advice regarding this issue?
I'm basically looking for a more elegant way of implementing this other
than using this->begin(); because that seems a bit contradictory to the
actual reason for the existence of the -> object.
Thanks guys,
Tyler
John Fine wrote:
> Tyler Earman wrote:
>> "I have noticed that when (this is C++) inheriting a templatized derived
>> class from a templatized base that in g++, references to elements of the
>> base class have to be qualified with this-> or with the name of the base
>> class put in front. But this is NOT needed in the Windows C++ compilers
>> so far as I can see.
> GCC is doing the correct thing according to the C++ standard. I
> personally think the C++ standard is bad and this feature makes C++ a
> worse language than it was before compilers enforced this language
> behavior.
>
> When coding to work around this problem, I find both this->name and
> base_class::name are ugly constructs. I don't use either to work
> around this problem. Instead I use using directives, such as:
>
> template <class X>
> class my_container : public std::vector<X>
> {
> typedef std::vector<X> super;
> using super::size;
> using super::empty;
> typedef typename super::iterator iterator;
>
> At the start of most classes, I typedef the major base class as
> "super" (not directly relevant to the current issue, but it helps).
> Then I have the appropriate using super:: declarations to identify all
> the function and variable names from that super class which will be
> used bare in the current class. You can't use using declarations for
> types from the base class, so those are best done with the typedef
> typename construct.
>
>
>
