c ++模板类，initialization（）vs {}

问题描述

我想知道为什么我不能在另一个类（C ++ 11）的范围内用（）而不是 {}

I am wondering why I can't initialize an instance of the following template class with () instead of {} within the scope of another class (C++ 11)? error: expected identifier before numeric constant

template <typename T>
class vec3 {

private:

    T   data[3];

public:

    vec3 (T a, T b, T c);
};

template <typename T> 
vec3<T>::vec3 (T a, T b, T c) 
{
    data[0] = a;
    data[1] = b;
    data[2] = c;
}

class whatever {

    vec3 <float> a (1,2,3); // not ok
    vec3 <float> b {1,2,3}; // ok

};

int main () {

    vec3 <float> a (1,2,3); // ok

    return 0;
}

推荐答案

在，因为@TC提到的原因在注释部分：

Initializers using () were disallowed in the proposal of non-static data member initializers - N2756, for the reasons mentioned by @T.C. in the comment section:

struct S {
    int i(x); // data member with initializer
    // ...
    static int x;
};

struct T {
    int i(x); // member function declaration
    // ...
    typedef int x;
};

一个可能的解决方案是依靠现有规则，如果一个声明可以是一个对象或函数，那么它是一个函数：

One possible solution is to rely on the existing rule that, if a declaration could be an object or a function, then it’s a function:

struct S {
    int i(j); // ill-formed...parsed as a member function,
              // type j looked up but not found
    // ...
    static int j;
};

类似的解决方案是应用另一个现有规则，目前仅在模板中使用，是一个类型或
别的东西，那么它是别的东西;我们可以使用typename如果
我们真的意味着一个类型：

A similar solution would be to apply another existing rule, currently used only in templates, that if T could be a type or something else, then it’s something else; and we can use "typename" if we really mean a type:

struct S {
    int i(x); // unabmiguously a data member
    int j(typename y); // unabmiguously a member function
};

这两种解决方案都引入了许多用户可能会误解的微妙通过
comp.lang.c ++中的许多问题，关于为什么 int i（）; 在块范围不声明
default-已初始化 int ）。本文提出的解决方案是仅允许初始化器 = initializer-clause 和 { initializer-list } 表单。

Both of those solutions introduce subtleties that are likely to be misunderstood by many users (as evidenced by the many questions on comp.lang.c++ about why "int i();" at block scope doesn’t declare a default-initialized int). The solution proposed in this paper is to allow only initializers of the "= initializer-clause" and "{ initializer-list }" forms.

这篇关于c ++模板类，initialization（）vs {}的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持！