Talk:Barton–Nackman trick: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:47, 22 May 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Barton–Nackman trick article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Computer science Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Computer scienceWikipedia:WikiProject Computer scienceTemplate:WikiProject Computer scienceComputer science articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Things you can help WikiProject Computer science with:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests :
- Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Computer science, computing, and Internet
Cleanup :
- Computer science articles needing attention
- Computer science articles needing expert attention
Copyedit :
- Computing
Expand :
- Computer science
Infobox :
- Computer science articles without infoboxes
Maintain :
- Timeline of computing 2020–present
Photo :
- Find pictures for the biographies of computer scientists (see List of computer scientists)
- Computing articles needing images
Stubs :
- Computer science stubs
Unreferenced :
- WikiProject Computer science/Unreferenced BLPs
Project-related :
- Tag all relevant articles in Category:Computer science and sub-categories with {{WikiProject Computer science}}

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

C/C++ Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject C/C++, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of C and C++ topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.C/C++Wikipedia:WikiProject C/C++Template:WikiProject C/C++C/C++ articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article falls within the scope of C++.

Note for editors

I saw that this article has been discussed at the following Google Groups thread. (If that link goes dead, search for a thread entitled "How to fix a program that depends on friend injection?" that began on March 11 2007). Note that at one time this article depended on information in Vandevoorde and Josuttis. David himself has edited this article to reflect that the book was slightly incorrect with respect to function template overloading (and noted that he had in the thread mentioned). Given all this, I ask future editors to be particularly careful to not inadvertedly re-introduce mistakes that have been corrected. Many thanks, Pcb21 Pete 09:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should add this note as a comment, to make sure anyone attempting to edit the article will see it. I'd expect a correction to be posted in reasonable time on the book errata, since David kindly forwarded a note to Nicolai, who maintains the errata page. When that will happen, we can change that comment to something like "note: see errata at http://... etc. etc." —Gennaro Prota ^•Talk 08:23, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal mistake

The proposal that is intended to "obsolete" the barton & nackman trick actually talks about the idiom Curiously Recurring Template Pattern (which concepts indeed declare obsolete then), even though it claims talking about the Barton & Nackman trick. I believe it confuses these two concepts.

As explained in the article, this is confused often. But as this is a link to a more or less official document containing this confusion, i will not remove that link from the article, but rather ask you what to do about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.174.239.213 (talk) 07:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What is achieved?

The article mentions that template overloading is not a problem anymore. So when and why would I use this trick nowadays? What can be achieved that can't be done by just writing free template functions? Would like to see an example here. 84.245.149.53 (talk) 10:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

friendly access yet still public

bool equal_to(value_type const& rhs) const; is a public function. There is no explanation why this is (and has to be) a public function when called by the friend function, when friend functions are supposed to be able to access private functions. QuentinUK (talk) 15:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 The article mentions that template overloading is not a problem anymore. So when and why would I use this trick nowadays? What can be achieved that can't be done by just writing free template functions? Would like to see an example here.
 [[Special:Contributions/84.245.149.53|84.245.149.53]] ([[User talk:84.245.149.53|talk]]) 10:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
+== friendly access yet still public ==
+bool equal_to(value_type const& rhs) const; is a public function. There is no explanation why this is (and has to be) a public function when called by the friend function, when friend functions are supposed to be able to access private functions. [[User:QuentinUK|QuentinUK]] ([[User talk:QuentinUK|talk]]) 15:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)