Search code examples
c++c++11templatestemplate-meta-programmingenable-if

enable_if in function members for void and inheritance


I'm trying to understand why this code does not compile:

// test.h
struct Base
  {
  virtual ~Base{};
  virtual void execute() {}
  virtual void execute(int) {}
  virtual void execute(double) {}
  }

template<class T>
struct Test : Base
  {
    void execute(typename std::enable_if<std::is_void<T>::value, void>::type)
      {
      // Do A
      }

    void execute(typename std::enable_if<!std::is_void<T>::value, int>::type t)
      {
      // Do B
      }
  };

// main.cpp
Test<void> t; 

I get a compiler error: "no type named type".

Same error even if I modify the A version of the code with

std::enable_if<std::is_void<T>::value>

The goal is to create a class that depending on the parameter T creates a different function members. In this case 2, but I'd be interested also in more.

[Edit] I've added the inheritance part I was talking about in the comments.


Solution

  • When you instantiated Test<void>, you also instantiated the declarations of all of it's member functions. That's just basic instantiation. What declarations does that give you? Something like this:

    void execute(void);
    void execute(<ill-formed> t);
    

    If you were expecting SFINAE to silently remove the ill-formed overload, you need to remember that the S stands for "substitution". The substitution of template arguments into the parameters of a (member) function template. Neither execute is a member function template. They are both regular member functions of a template specialization.

    You can fix it in a couple of ways. One way would be to make those two templates, do SFINAE properly, and let overload resolution take you from there. @YSC already shows you how.

    Another way is to use a helper template. This way you get your original goal, for a single member function to exist at any one time.

    template<typename T>
    struct TestBase {
      void execute(T t) { }
    };
    
    template<>
    struct TestBase<void> {
      void execute() { }
    };
    
    template<class T>
    struct Test : private TestBase<T> {
      using TestBase<T>::execute;
    };
    

    You can choose whichever works best for your needs.


    To address your edit. I think the second approach actually fits your needs better.

    template<typename T>
    struct TestBase : Base {
      void execute(T t) override { }
    };
    
    template<>
    struct TestBase<void> : Base {
      void execute() override { }
    };
    

    TestBase is the middle man that accomplishes what you seem to be after.