I want to check for the existence of a function in a specific namespace using SFINAE. I have found SFINAE to test a free function from another namespace which does the job, but there are some things I don't understand.
Currently I have this working code, straight from the linked question:
// switch to 0 to test the other case
#define ENABLE_FOO_BAR 1
namespace foo {
#if ENABLE_FOO_BAR
int bar();
#endif
}
namespace detail_overload {
template<typename... Args> void bar(Args&&...);
}
namespace detail {
using namespace detail_overload;
using namespace foo;
template<typename T> decltype(bar()) test(T);
template<typename> void test(...);
}
static constexpr bool has_foo_bar = std::is_same<decltype(detail::test<int>(0)), int>::value;
static_assert(has_foo_bar == ENABLE_FOO_BAR, "something went wrong");
(the ENABLE_FOO_BAR
macro is just for testing purpose, in my real code I don't have such a macro available otherwise I wouldn't be using SFINAE)
However, as soon as I put detail_overload::bar()
in any other namespace (adjusting the using
directive as needed), the detection breaks silently and the static_assert
kicks in when foo::bar()
exists. It only works when the "dummy" bar()
overload is directly in the global namespace, or part of the ::detail_overload
namespace (note the global ::
scope).
// breaks
namespace feature_test {
namespace detail_overload {
template<typename... Args> void bar(Args&&...);
}
namespace detail {
using namespace detail_overload;
using namespace foo;
//...
// breaks
namespace feature_test {
template<typename... Args> void bar(Args&&...);
namespace detail {
using namespace foo;
//...
// breaks
namespace detail {
namespace detail_overload {
template<typename... Args> void bar(Args&&...);
}
using namespace detail_overload;
using namespace foo;
//...
// works
template<typename... Args> void bar(Args&&...);
namespace feature_test {
namespace detail {
using namespace foo;
//...
// works
namespace detail_overload {
template<typename... Args> void bar(Args&&...);
}
namespace feature_test {
namespace detail {
using namespace detail_overload;
using namespace foo;
//...
I realize this is the very same problem as the question I linked to, and as mentioned I already have a working solution, but what is not addressed there is why precisely does this happen?
As a side question, is there any way to achieve correct SFINAE detection without polluting the global namespace with either bar()
or a detail_overload
namespace? As you can guess from the non-working examples, I'd like to neatly wrap everything in a single feature_test
namespace.
I'll change it slightly so the fall-back declaration of bar
isn't a template (= shorter code), and don't use SFINAE as this is purely a name lookup issue.
namespace foo {
int bar(int);
}
namespace feature_test {
namespace detail_overload {
void bar(...);
}
namespace detail {
using namespace detail_overload;
using namespace foo;
void test() { bar(0); } // (A)
}
}
In line (A), the compiler needs to find the name bar
. How is it looked up? It's not argument-dependent, so it must be unqualified lookup: [basic.lookup.unqual]/2
The declarations from the namespace nominated by a using-directive become visible in a namespace enclosing the using-directive; see 7.3.4. For the purpose of the unqualified name lookup rules described in 3.4.1, the declarations from the namespace nominated by the using-directive are considered members of that enclosing namespace.
Note they become in an enclosing namespace, not the enclosing namespace. The details from [namespace.udir]/2 reveal the issue:
[...] During unqualified name lookup (3.4.1), the names appear as if they were declared in the nearest enclosing namespace which contains both the using-directive and the nominated namespace.
That is, for the name lookup of bar
inside test
:
namespace foo {
int bar(int);
}
// as if
using foo::bar;
namespace feature_test {
namespace detail_overload {
void bar(...);
}
// as if
using detail_overload::bar;
namespace detail {
// resolved
// using namespace detail_overload;
// using namespace foo;
void test() { bar(0); } // (A)
}
}
Therefore, the name bar
found in feature_test
hides the name (not) found in the global scope.
Note: Maybe you can hack around this issue with argument-dependent name lookup (and a second SFINAE). If something comes to my mind, I'll add it.