Re: Templates and const function name resolution

From:

"Greg Herlihy" <greghe@pacbell.net>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++.moderated

Date:

30 Aug 2006 08:13:51 -0400

Message-ID:

<1156915526.052829.196690@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>

kanze wrote:

Dimitar wrote:

I have the following class C and the function F:

class C
{
public:
   const vector<int>& GetV() const { return m_v; }
private:
   vector<int>& GetV() { return m_v; }
   vector<int> m_v;
};

template<class T1, class T2>
void F(const typename vector<T1>::iterator& first,
         const typename vector<T1>::iterator& last)
{
   for (vector<T1>::iterator it = first; it != last; ++it)
   {
      const vector<T2>& v = it->GetV();
   }
}

....

I am wondering why the code as presented above does not
compile and how can I make it compile without introducing
const iterator?

Change the name of one of the functions. It is almost always a
bad idea for functions with the same name to have different
access rights.

I would go further and question whether declaring a private, accessor
method makes much sense in the first place. After all, any context in
which the private GetV() method could be called is also a context that
that enjoys direct access to the private m_v member variable. And if
C's implemention cannot handle its own m_v data member according to its
own specifications, then there's little chance that any other code in
the program will do any better.

Greg

[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]