Markus Schöpflin <markus.schoepflin@comsoft.de> writes:
Hello,
unfortunately boost.python is unusable on that platform because most of the tests fail at runtime with a stack overflow. The reason is illustrated in the following code sample:
---%<--- void foo(int); template <class T> void foo(T) { foo(0); }
int main() { foo(0); } --->%---
When compiling this with CXX 6.5, the code compiles and links cleanly, despite the fact that the overload for foo() is not defined. Instead the compiler instantiates foo<int>(int) and then uses the instantiation for the call to foo() which of course leads to a stack overflow.
I'm confused. I was pretty sure Ralf was running Boost.Python on that compiler. Ralf?
I had a look at the standard what should happen in this case, but after reading [temp.over] I'm not really sure if we don't indeed end up with two candidate functions for the overload resolution of foo(), one being the overload itself and the other the specialization of the function template for int. Could anyone please clarify this?
The non-template function should be preferred. The function template should never even get instantiated.
As for a possible workaround, replacing the overload with a specialization of the function template would work, AFAICT. Would such a patch be accepted?
If it's a localized patch somewhere in Boost.Python, it might. But this sounds like the sort of problem that would require sweeping fixes. No? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com