Created on 2013-09-19.00:00:00 last changed 63 months ago
Additional note, April, 2015:
EWG has decided not to make a change in this area. See EWG issue 132.
Rationale (February, 2014):
CWG felt that this issue is more appropriately considered by EWG.
There does not appear to be a way to declare (not define) a partial specialization of a static data member template outside its class. The rule for explicit specializations (17.8.3 [temp.expl.spec] paragraph 13) is that the presence or absence of an initializer determines whether the explicit specialization is a definition or not. Applying this rule to the partial specialization case, however, would conflict with being able to provide an initializer on the declaration within the class.
Do we need to support declaring partial specializations of static data member templates outside their class?
|2015-04-13 00:00:00||admin||set||messages: + msg5437|
|2015-04-13 00:00:00||admin||set||status: extension -> nad|
|2014-03-03 00:00:00||admin||set||messages: + msg4989|
|2014-03-03 00:00:00||admin||set||status: open -> extension|