Ion Gaztañaga wrote:
* Is this gcc error correct? Revising a bit ADL + template issues (a fairly complicated logic that should be removed from C++, in my opinion) I think that gcc is right.
Questionable. The problem is that for static_pointer_cast<int> to be valid, static_pointer_cast must be known to be a template. It is understandable why g++ rejects it without a declaration, but I'm not sure whether this is conforming now, much less whether it'd be conforming tomorrow if there are open core issues for this case.
I think I should post this to c.s.c++ to see if this call should kick ADL. If so, I will report a bug to the gcc mailing list. Anyway, static_pointer_cast is not a portable ADL function in Boost. What should we do? Declare an overload taking an additional dummy parameter to deduce the return type?
template<class Source, class Target> smart_ptr<Target> static_pointer_cast (const smart_ptr<Source> &s, const Target &);
so that the ADL call is:
Pointer p;
IntPtr ip = static_pointer_cast(p, int());
We used to write template<class Source, class Target> smart_ptr<Target> static_pointer_cast (const smart_ptr<Source> &s, Target * = 0); IntPtr ip = static_pointer_cast(p, (int*)0); when MSVC didn't support explicit template arguments. Another option is template<class Source, class Target> void static_pointer_cast ( const smart_ptr<Source> &s, smart_ptr<Target> & t ); Have you tried #include <boost/pointer_cast.hpp> // in class { using boost::static_pointer_cast; static_pointer_cast<T>( ps ); } under g++? Does it still fail? This is required to support the case where ps is a raw pointer.