Loki

Bugs item #1584632, was opened at 2006-10-25 20:06
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by syntheticpp
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1584632&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
>Status: Closed
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
>Assigned to: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Summary: Loki Macros Don't Apply Namespace.

Initial Comment:
Several LOKI_ macros #defined in files don't use the
Loki namespace.

For example :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS DontPropagateConst
Should be :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS ::Loki::DontPropagateConst

And this example from SmallObj.h :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_SMALLOBJ_LIFETIME
LongevityLifetime::DieAsSmallObjectParent

should be :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_SMALLOBJ_LIFETIME
::Loki::LongevityLifetime::DieAsSmallObjectParent

This causes compiler errors if the source file does not
have the "using Loki;" directive.  (And of course, we
should never add any "using ...;" directive inside a
header file.)  The solution is to go through all header
and source files, review each macro, and add the
"::Loki::" namespace resolution if necessary.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-25 22:48

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've only found the two.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1584632&group_id=29557

Bugs item #1584632, was opened at 2006-10-25 20:06
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by syntheticpp
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1584632&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Closed
Resolution: None
Priority: 5
Private: No
Submitted By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Assigned to: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Summary: Loki Macros Don't Apply Namespace.

Initial Comment:
Several LOKI_ macros #defined in files don't use the
Loki namespace.

For example :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS DontPropagateConst
Should be :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS ::Loki::DontPropagateConst

And this example from SmallObj.h :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_SMALLOBJ_LIFETIME
LongevityLifetime::DieAsSmallObjectParent

should be :
#define LOKI_DEFAULT_SMALLOBJ_LIFETIME
::Loki::LongevityLifetime::DieAsSmallObjectParent

This causes compiler errors if the source file does not
have the "using Loki;" directive.  (And of course, we
should never add any "using ...;" directive inside a
header file.)  The solution is to go through all header
and source files, review each macro, and add the
"::Loki::" namespace resolution if necessary.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-26 13:05

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've found one more.

Sometimes svn commit breaks with a MERGE error,
so I've committed it again today:

Log Message:
-----------
move macro values into Loki namespace

Modified Paths:
--------------
    trunk/include/loki/ConstPolicy.h
    trunk/include/loki/ScopeGuard.h
    trunk/include/loki/SmallObj.h
    trunk/test/ScopeGuard/main.cpp

Modified: trunk/include/loki/ConstPolicy.h
===================================================================
--- trunk/include/loki/ConstPolicy.h	2006-10-25 20:40:40 UTC
(rev 768)
+++ trunk/include/loki/ConstPolicy.h	2006-10-26 10:58:19 UTC
(rev 769)
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@
 
 // default will not break existing code
 #ifndef LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS
-#define LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS DontPropagateConst
+#define LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS ::Loki::DontPropagateConst
 #endif
 
 } // end namespace Loki

Modified: trunk/include/loki/ScopeGuard.h
===================================================================
--- trunk/include/loki/ScopeGuard.h	2006-10-25 20:40:40 UTC
(rev 768)
+++ trunk/include/loki/ScopeGuard.h	2006-10-26 10:58:19 UTC
(rev 769)
@@ -358,8 +358,8 @@
 #define LOKI_CONCATENATE(s1, s2)        
LOKI_CONCATENATE_DIRECT(s1, s2)
 #define LOKI_ANONYMOUS_VARIABLE(str)    
LOKI_CONCATENATE(str, __LINE__)
 
-#define LOKI_ON_BLOCK_EXIT      ScopeGuard
LOKI_ANONYMOUS_VARIABLE(scopeGuard) = MakeGuard
-#define LOKI_ON_BLOCK_EXIT_OBJ  ScopeGuard
LOKI_ANONYMOUS_VARIABLE(scopeGuard) = MakeObjGuard
+#define LOKI_ON_BLOCK_EXIT      ::Loki::ScopeGuard
LOKI_ANONYMOUS_VARIABLE(scopeGuard) = ::Loki::MakeGuard
+#define LOKI_ON_BLOCK_EXIT_OBJ  ::Loki::ScopeGuard
LOKI_ANONYMOUS_VARIABLE(scopeGuard) = ::Loki::MakeObjGuard
 
 #endif // end file guardian
 

Modified: trunk/include/loki/SmallObj.h
===================================================================
--- trunk/include/loki/SmallObj.h	2006-10-25 20:40:40 UTC
(rev 768)
+++ trunk/include/loki/SmallObj.h	2006-10-26 10:58:19 UTC
(rev 769)
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@
 #endif
 
 #ifndef LOKI_DEFAULT_SMALLOBJ_LIFETIME
-#define LOKI_DEFAULT_SMALLOBJ_LIFETIME
LongevityLifetime::DieAsSmallObjectParent
+#define LOKI_DEFAULT_SMALLOBJ_LIFETIME
::Loki::LongevityLifetime::DieAsSmallObjectParent
 #endif
 
 #if defined(LOKI_SMALL_OBJECT_USE_NEW_ARRAY) &&
defined(_MSC_VER)

Modified: trunk/test/ScopeGuard/main.cpp
===================================================================
--- trunk/test/ScopeGuard/main.cpp	2006-10-25 20:40:40 UTC
(rev 768)
+++ trunk/test/ScopeGuard/main.cpp	2006-10-26 10:58:19 UTC
(rev 769)
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
 
     void AddFriend(User& newFriend);
     void AddFriendGuarded(User& newFriend);
+    void AddFriendGuardedMacros(User& newFriend);
 
     size_t countFriends();
    
@@ -84,7 +85,13 @@
     guardRef.Dismiss();
 }
 
+void User::AddFriendGuardedMacros(User&)
+{
+    LOKI_ON_BLOCK_EXIT_OBJ(friends_, &UserCont::pop_back);
(void) LOKI_ANONYMOUS_VARIABLE(scopeGuard);
+    LOKI_ON_BLOCK_EXIT(Decrement, Loki::ByRef(fCount));
(void) LOKI_ANONYMOUS_VARIABLE(scopeGuard);
+}
 
+
 int main()
 {
     UserDatabase db;

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-25 22:48

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've only found the two.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1584632&group_id=29557

Nitin Soman wrote:
> Hi,
>  I have used Loki small object allocator.
>  Here i see the following peice of code to remove the
>  warning:
> 
>             typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
> 
>             (void)lock; // get rid of warning
> 
>  If i remove the above statement(used to remove warning)
>  i get a warning lock variable not used.
> 
>  Why dont we get rid of this warning by using an
>  empty destructor in class lock in SingleThreaded
>  Something like this:
>         class Lock
>         {
>             explicit Lock(const SingleThreaded&) {}
> 
>             public:
> 
>             explicit Lock()
>             {
>             }
>             // To Remove Warning
>             ~Lock()
>             {
>             }
> 	  }
> 
> I am sorry but please do correct me if i am wrong.
> 
> Thanking you,
> Nitin 
> 

Nice idea!
But could we rely on the compiler optimizing
the extra destruction away?

Peter

Hi Nitin,

I think your idea will work for some compilers, but I don't think it 
will work for all compilers.  Since the destructor is trivially empty, 
there is no harm in declaring it.  With that mind, why not just declare 
it as you have shown.  There is the added benefit of making it clear to 
readers that we did not omit the destructor by oversight, but truly 
intended for it to do nothing.

Cheers,

Rich

Peter Kümmel wrote:
> Nitin Soman wrote:
> 
>>Hi,
>> I have used Loki small object allocator.
>> Here i see the following peice of code to remove the
>> warning:
>>
>>            typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
>>
>>            (void)lock; // get rid of warning
>>
>> If i remove the above statement(used to remove warning)
>> i get a warning lock variable not used.
>>
>> Why dont we get rid of this warning by using an
>> empty destructor in class lock in SingleThreaded
>> Something like this:
>>        class Lock
>>        {
>>            explicit Lock(const SingleThreaded&) {}
>>
>>            public:
>>
>>            explicit Lock()
>>            {
>>            }
>>            // To Remove Warning
>>            ~Lock()
>>            {
>>            }
>>	  }
>>
>>I am sorry but please do correct me if i am wrong.

>>Thanking you,
>>Nitin 

> Nice idea!
> But could we rely on the compiler optimizing
> the extra destruction away?

> Peter

Hi Dieter,

I agree with your assessment, and filed a bug report
regarding the Loki macros.  I came across the same
problem last week.

Thanks,

Rich


--- Dieter Rosch <dieterr@...> wrote:

> Hi,
> In loki/ConstPolicy.h, line 57,

> // default will not break existing code
> #ifndef LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS
> #define LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS DontPropagateConst
> #endif

> The LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS should be defined as
> ::Loki::DontPropogateConst.

> Otherwise if one uses the macro anywhere, and one
> does not have either

> Using namespace Loki;
> Or 
> Using Loki::DontPropogateConst;

> The compiler complains about incomplete template
> arguments.

> Dieter Rosch

DieterR@... wrote:
>> However, if I simply comment out lines  32  - 457 (leaving the first and
>> the last Seq<> in), it seems fine.
> 
> Do you get this error also only with the -qlanglvl=ansi option?
> 
> No, this error occurs in extended mode as well. If you need me to
> investigate further, let me know what to check. But I'm assuming the extra
> definitions are for older compilers (since VC++ 2003 and 2005 seem to be
> happy with only the 2 defines...) (?).

Could you test it with the attached Seq. It uses a more elegant recursive
definition.

>> Secondly (I think I've mentioned this before), the AIX compiler complain
>> about NeverMatched in SmartPtr.h. I had to add the body {} to get it
>> work. From what I understand of the code, this should not make any
>> difference.
> 
> Yes, we could add this.
> 
> 
> That would be great, at the moment I'm manually patching it every time I
> update my copy of Loki :)

Done: http://svn.sourceforge.net/loki-lib/?rev=766&view=rev

Peter

Hi Peter,


I checked the attached Sequence.h on our AIX compiler and it compiles
without problems in the projects I tested.

Thanks also for the change to NeverMatched.

Regards,
Dieter

-----Original Message-----
From: loki-lib-general-bounces@...
[mailto:loki-lib-general-bounces@...] On Behalf Of Pete=
r
K=FCmmel
Sent: 20 October 2006 12:22 PM
To: A mailing list for the Loki library and related topics.
Subject: Re: Sequence.h, SmartPtr.h on AIX

DieterR@... wrote:
>> However, if I simply comment out lines  32  - 457 (leaving the first a=
nd
>> the last Seq<> in), it seems fine.
>=20
> Do you get this error also only with the -qlanglvl=3Dansi option?
>=20
> No, this error occurs in extended mode as well. If you need me to
> investigate further, let me know what to check. But I'm assuming the ex=
tra
> definitions are for older compilers (since VC++ 2003 and 2005 seem to b=
e
> happy with only the 2 defines...) (?).

Could you test it with the attached Seq. It uses a more elegant recursive=

definition.

>> Secondly (I think I've mentioned this before), the AIX compiler compla=
in
>> about NeverMatched in SmartPtr.h. I had to add the body {} to get it
>> work. From what I understand of the code, this should not make any
>> difference.
>=20
> Yes, we could add this.
>=20
>=20
> That would be great, at the moment I'm manually patching it every time =
I
> update my copy of Loki :)

Done: http://svn.sourceforge.net/loki-lib/?rev=3D766&view=3Drev

Peter

********************
Nedbank Limited Reg No 1951/000009/06. The following link displays the na=
mes of the Nedbank Board of Directors and Company Secretary. [ http://www=
.nedbank.co.za/terms/DirectorsNedbank.htm ]
This email is confidential and is intended for the addressee only. The fo=
llowing link will take you to Nedbank's legal notice. [ http://www.nedban=
k.co.za/terms/EmailDisclaimer.htm ]
********************

Bugs item #1580101, was opened at 2006-10-19 01:30
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by syntheticpp
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Assigned to: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Summary: SmallObject does not work with ObjectLevelLockable

Initial Comment:
Several functions inside SmallObjectBase class have
lines like these to lock the allocator while the
function is called.
            typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
            (void)lock; // get rid of warning

The problem is that these lines require
MyThreadingModel to have a default constructor.  The
default constructor for ObjectLevelLockable is not
accessible.

SmallObj.h doesn't compile if
LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING is defined.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 19:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Is this not by design?
The memory managment for SmallObjects
is done by one instance for all objects
of the class which inherits from 
SmallObject (MC++D 4.8).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Bugs item #1580101, was opened at 2006-10-18 16:30
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rich_sposato
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Assigned to: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Summary: SmallObject does not work with ObjectLevelLockable

Initial Comment:
Several functions inside SmallObjectBase class have
lines like these to lock the allocator while the
function is called.
            typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
            (void)lock; // get rid of warning

The problem is that these lines require
MyThreadingModel to have a default constructor.  The
default constructor for ObjectLevelLockable is not
accessible.

SmallObj.h doesn't compile if
LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING is defined.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Date: 2006-10-19 11:38

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=749922

> The memory managment for SmallObjects is done by one
> instance for all objects of the class which inherits from
> SmallObject.

True, the memory management is done by one instance of the
small-object-allocator, but that's a separate issue from how
that one instance is locked.

SingleThreaded : No locking of the small-object-allocator.
ObjectLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.
ClassLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.

The ObjectLevelLockable and ClassLevelLockable behaviors are
the same for singletons - even though the implementation is
slightly different.  What I'd like to do is make a few small
changes SmallObj.h so the allocator works correctly with
ObjectLevelLockable.  I think people will make small objects
and lock those objects individually with ObjectLevelLockable
even though the allocator will have its own specific lock,
separate from the locks for the allocated small objects.  


Something else I'd like to do is make 2 copies of many of
the test projects.  One copy for SingleThreaded, another for
ObjectLevelLockable, and a third for ClassLevelLockable.

Cheers,

Rich


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 10:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Is this not by design?
The memory managment for SmallObjects
is done by one instance for all objects
of the class which inherits from 
SmallObject (MC++D 4.8).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Bugs item #1580101, was opened at 2006-10-19 01:30
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by syntheticpp
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Assigned to: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Summary: SmallObject does not work with ObjectLevelLockable

Initial Comment:
Several functions inside SmallObjectBase class have
lines like these to lock the allocator while the
function is called.
            typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
            (void)lock; // get rid of warning

The problem is that these lines require
MyThreadingModel to have a default constructor.  The
default constructor for ObjectLevelLockable is not
accessible.

SmallObj.h doesn't compile if
LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING is defined.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 21:37

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

OK, atm it's not clear to me why it's not possible to use
object level locking, seems the threading model of SmallObj
propagets into the inheriting class.

>Something else I'd like to do is make 2 copies of many of
>the test projects.  One copy for SingleThreaded, another for
>ObjectLevelLockable, and a third for ClassLevelLockable.

The simplest could be to write a threading independent test
code which we include three times into the main file,
something like this:

#define THREADING SINGLE
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

#define THREADING MULTI_OBJECT
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

#define THREADING MULTI_CLASS
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

int main()
{
    test_SINGLE()
    test_MULTI_OBJECT()
    test_MULTI_CLASS()
    return 0;
}

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Date: 2006-10-19 20:38

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=749922

> The memory managment for SmallObjects is done by one
> instance for all objects of the class which inherits from
> SmallObject.

True, the memory management is done by one instance of the
small-object-allocator, but that's a separate issue from how
that one instance is locked.

SingleThreaded : No locking of the small-object-allocator.
ObjectLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.
ClassLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.

The ObjectLevelLockable and ClassLevelLockable behaviors are
the same for singletons - even though the implementation is
slightly different.  What I'd like to do is make a few small
changes SmallObj.h so the allocator works correctly with
ObjectLevelLockable.  I think people will make small objects
and lock those objects individually with ObjectLevelLockable
even though the allocator will have its own specific lock,
separate from the locks for the allocated small objects.  


Something else I'd like to do is make 2 copies of many of
the test projects.  One copy for SingleThreaded, another for
ObjectLevelLockable, and a third for ClassLevelLockable.

Cheers,

Rich


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 19:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Is this not by design?
The memory managment for SmallObjects
is done by one instance for all objects
of the class which inherits from 
SmallObject (MC++D 4.8).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Bugs item #1580101, was opened at 2006-10-18 16:30
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by rich_sposato
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Assigned to: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Summary: SmallObject does not work with ObjectLevelLockable

Initial Comment:
Several functions inside SmallObjectBase class have
lines like these to lock the allocator while the
function is called.
            typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
            (void)lock; // get rid of warning

The problem is that these lines require
MyThreadingModel to have a default constructor.  The
default constructor for ObjectLevelLockable is not
accessible.

SmallObj.h doesn't compile if
LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING is defined.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Date: 2006-10-19 17:31

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=749922

I'm thinking of changing functions in SmallObjectBase from:
static void operator delete ( void * p, std::size_t size )
{
      typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
      (void)lock; // get rid of warning
      MyAllocatorSingleton::Instance().Deallocate(p, size);
}

to this:
static void operator delete ( void * p, std::size_t size )
{
#ifdef LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING
      MyAllocatorSingleton& instance =
          MyAllocatorSingleton::Instance();
      typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock( instance );
      (void)lock; // get rid of warning
      instance.Deallocate(p, size);
#else
      typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
      (void)lock; // get rid of warning
      MyAllocatorSingleton::Instance().Deallocate(p, size);
#endif
}

Within SmallObjectBase functions, object-level-locking only
applies to MyAllocatorSingleton, and does not propagate to
classes that inherit from SmallObject.

I'm thinking over your idea of making a threading
independent test that gets included 3 times.  I'm still
leaning towards making 3 separate projects for each test,
since the overall thread model will be different for each. 
I don't see a way around that with the idea you suggested.

Sincerely,

Rich


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 12:37

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

OK, atm it's not clear to me why it's not possible to use
object level locking, seems the threading model of SmallObj
propagets into the inheriting class.

>Something else I'd like to do is make 2 copies of many of
>the test projects.  One copy for SingleThreaded, another for
>ObjectLevelLockable, and a third for ClassLevelLockable.

The simplest could be to write a threading independent test
code which we include three times into the main file,
something like this:

#define THREADING SINGLE
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

#define THREADING MULTI_OBJECT
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

#define THREADING MULTI_CLASS
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

int main()
{
    test_SINGLE()
    test_MULTI_OBJECT()
    test_MULTI_CLASS()
    return 0;
}

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Date: 2006-10-19 11:38

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=749922

> The memory managment for SmallObjects is done by one
> instance for all objects of the class which inherits from
> SmallObject.

True, the memory management is done by one instance of the
small-object-allocator, but that's a separate issue from how
that one instance is locked.

SingleThreaded : No locking of the small-object-allocator.
ObjectLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.
ClassLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.

The ObjectLevelLockable and ClassLevelLockable behaviors are
the same for singletons - even though the implementation is
slightly different.  What I'd like to do is make a few small
changes SmallObj.h so the allocator works correctly with
ObjectLevelLockable.  I think people will make small objects
and lock those objects individually with ObjectLevelLockable
even though the allocator will have its own specific lock,
separate from the locks for the allocated small objects.  


Something else I'd like to do is make 2 copies of many of
the test projects.  One copy for SingleThreaded, another for
ObjectLevelLockable, and a third for ClassLevelLockable.

Cheers,

Rich


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 10:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Is this not by design?
The memory managment for SmallObjects
is done by one instance for all objects
of the class which inherits from 
SmallObject (MC++D 4.8).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Bugs item #1580101, was opened at 2006-10-19 01:30
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by syntheticpp
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 7
Submitted By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Assigned to: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Summary: SmallObject does not work with ObjectLevelLockable

Initial Comment:
Several functions inside SmallObjectBase class have
lines like these to lock the allocator while the
function is called.
            typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
            (void)lock; // get rid of warning

The problem is that these lines require
MyThreadingModel to have a default constructor.  The
default constructor for ObjectLevelLockable is not
accessible.

SmallObj.h doesn't compile if
LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING is defined.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-20 10:47

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Could you post a code example where this change is necessary?
Currently SmallObj doesn't use Loki::ObjectLevelLockable
at all also not when LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING is defined,
because LOKI_DEFAULT_THREADING_NO_OBJ_LEVEL is used
as threading policy.

Yes, my propose with one independent test file 
only makes sense when the changes between the different 
threading code isn't too big, so if you see that this is
not the case, then it's better to add a new file.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Date: 2006-10-20 02:31

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=749922

I'm thinking of changing functions in SmallObjectBase from:
static void operator delete ( void * p, std::size_t size )
{
      typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
      (void)lock; // get rid of warning
      MyAllocatorSingleton::Instance().Deallocate(p, size);
}

to this:
static void operator delete ( void * p, std::size_t size )
{
#ifdef LOKI_OBJECT_LEVEL_THREADING
      MyAllocatorSingleton& instance =
          MyAllocatorSingleton::Instance();
      typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock( instance );
      (void)lock; // get rid of warning
      instance.Deallocate(p, size);
#else
      typename MyThreadingModel::Lock lock;
      (void)lock; // get rid of warning
      MyAllocatorSingleton::Instance().Deallocate(p, size);
#endif
}

Within SmallObjectBase functions, object-level-locking only
applies to MyAllocatorSingleton, and does not propagate to
classes that inherit from SmallObject.

I'm thinking over your idea of making a threading
independent test that gets included 3 times.  I'm still
leaning towards making 3 separate projects for each test,
since the overall thread model will be different for each. 
I don't see a way around that with the idea you suggested.

Sincerely,

Rich


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 21:37

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

OK, atm it's not clear to me why it's not possible to use
object level locking, seems the threading model of SmallObj
propagets into the inheriting class.

>Something else I'd like to do is make 2 copies of many of
>the test projects.  One copy for SingleThreaded, another for
>ObjectLevelLockable, and a third for ClassLevelLockable.

The simplest could be to write a threading independent test
code which we include three times into the main file,
something like this:

#define THREADING SINGLE
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

#define THREADING MULTI_OBJECT
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

#define THREADING MULTI_CLASS
#include <test.cpp>
#undef THREADING

int main()
{
    test_SINGLE()
    test_MULTI_OBJECT()
    test_MULTI_CLASS()
    return 0;
}

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Richard Sposato (rich_sposato)
Date: 2006-10-19 20:38

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=749922

> The memory managment for SmallObjects is done by one
> instance for all objects of the class which inherits from
> SmallObject.

True, the memory management is done by one instance of the
small-object-allocator, but that's a separate issue from how
that one instance is locked.

SingleThreaded : No locking of the small-object-allocator.
ObjectLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.
ClassLevelLockable : The only instance the small-object-
allocator should be locked.

The ObjectLevelLockable and ClassLevelLockable behaviors are
the same for singletons - even though the implementation is
slightly different.  What I'd like to do is make a few small
changes SmallObj.h so the allocator works correctly with
ObjectLevelLockable.  I think people will make small objects
and lock those objects individually with ObjectLevelLockable
even though the allocator will have its own specific lock,
separate from the locks for the allocated small objects.  


Something else I'd like to do is make 2 copies of many of
the test projects.  One copy for SingleThreaded, another for
ObjectLevelLockable, and a third for ClassLevelLockable.

Cheers,

Rich


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 19:16

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Is this not by design?
The memory managment for SmallObjects
is done by one instance for all objects
of the class which inherits from 
SmallObject (MC++D 4.8).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1580101&group_id=29557

Hi Rich,
 Thanks a lot for your help. I think
 this might help. 
 Actually i wanted to implement multithreading
 in two ways. One is i wanted to remove the loki 
 locks since i didnot want to rewrite the locks 
 since i already had them in place.This meant i had
 to move the volatile declaration away from
 ObjectLevelLockable and place them in singleton.
 And second was i rewrote the code in 
 the place given by Loki. In either cases it 
 gave me errors.
 I will try your suggestion and revert back in case 
 of errors.
Thanks a lot once again.
Nilesh Joshi

-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Sposato [mailto:rds@...]
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 5:12 AM
To: nilesh.kjoshi@...; loki-lib-general@...
Subject: Re: Help Required for Loki's small object


Hi Nilesh,

I recommend defining T as "volatile T" when using
SingletonHolder with a multi-threaded model.

The function:
inline T & SingletonHolder< T, CreationPolicy,
    LifetimePolicy, ThreadingModel, MutexPolicy >
    ::Instance()
will return a reference to a volatile T if you use a
multi-threaded model and if you declare your singleton
like this:
::Loki::SingletonHolder< volatile T, whatever,
   whatever, ::Loki::ObjectLevelLockable,
   whatever >;

If you define it like this:
::Loki::SingletonHolder< T, whatever,
   whatever, ::Loki::ObjectLevelLockable,
   whatever >;
without the "volatile T" it will not return a
reference
with the proper volatile qualification.

Meanwhile, I found another bug with SmallObject and
ObjectLevelLockable while studying this bug.  I will
have look at that bug.

Cheers,

Rich


--- Richard Sposato <rds@...> wrote:

> Hi Nilesh,
> 
> Can you tell us exactly what error messages you get
> from GCC?
> 
> Meanwhile, I'm going to take another look at Loki's
> test projects.  I'm 
> sure we have several tests which cover the
> singleton, threading, and 
> small-object-allocator parts of Loki.  You might
> want to take a look at 
> those test projects and see if any of them are
> similar enough to how you 
> use Loki.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Rich
> 
> nilesh joshi wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I am new for using small object allocator.
> > I have ported it on gcc compiler for Motorolla
> processor.
> > It compiles and works fine for single threaded
> option while
> > using singleton.
> > But as soon as i give an option for
> ObjectLevelLockable
> > the GCC compiler start giving errors.
> > This is because for ObjectLevelLockable class,
> Loki makes use
> > of a volatile variable for class Host in object
> > and SingleThreaded doesnot make use of one.
> > This is used to create a pointer instance in
> singleton.h
> > But the singleton implementation for instance()
> doesnot return
> > a volatile reference.
> > Is there a trick that is to be used to remove
> these errors 
> > or is it that we have to do manual changes to
> return the 
> > volatile reference everytime we use multithreaded
> applications.
> > Awaiting your reply.
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Regards,
> > Nilesh.
> 
> 
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support
> web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated
> technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1
> based on Apache Geronimo
>
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Loki-lib-general mailing list
> Loki-lib-general@...
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/loki-lib-general
> 



http://www.patni.com
World-Wide Partnerships. World-Class Solutions.
_____________________________________________________________________

This e-mail message may contain proprietary, confidential or legally
privileged information for the sole use of the person or entity to
whom this message was originally addressed. Any review, e-transmission
dissemination or other use of or taking of any action in reliance upon
this information by persons or entities other than the intended
recipient is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error
kindly delete  this e-mail from your records. If it appears that this
mail has been forwarded to you without proper authority, please notify
us immediately at netadmin@... and delete this mail. 
_____________________________________________________________________

Bugs item #1570582, was opened at 2006-10-04 12:13
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by syntheticpp
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1570582&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
>Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 8
Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Assigned to: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Summary: Loki won't compile on GCC4.1 because of injected friends.

Initial Comment:
Loki uses injected friends which won't work since GCC 4.1:

===========================================
=================
struct foo
{
  friend void bar ()
  {
  }
};

int main ()
{
  bar ();
}
===========================================
=================

===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-2.95 version 2.95.4
$ g++-2.95 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-2.95 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-3.3 version g++-3.3 (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 
1:3.3.6-13)
$ g++-3.3 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-3.3 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-3.4 version g++-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Debian 3.4.6-4)
$ g++-3.4 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-3.4 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-4.0 version g++-4.0 (GCC) 4.0.4 20060507 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.0.3-3)
$ g++-4.0 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-4.0 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-4.1 version g++-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.2 20060901 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)
$ g++-4.1 -c friend.cc
friend.cc: In function 'int main()':
friend.cc:10: error: 'bar' was not declared in this scope
Compilation finished, g++-4.1 returned 1
===========================================
=================

See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-18 21:18

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

See also the FAQ about friends

http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#friend


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-17 12:26

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

It's a compiler bug (msvc and all gcc versions, 
maybe 4.2 has fixed it):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29486

- test code added
- workaround added to enable the old in-class-definitions
- GCC 4.1 maybe works with -ffriend-injection 
  (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-16 18:55

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've tried also to patch StrongPtr, but without success.

All compilers (msvc, gcc 3.4, 4.2) couldn't resolve a
ambiguity of ReleaseAll (after removing the wrong 
"typename U" template parameter). 

Seems this hits a compiler limit; maybe because of
an incomplete std implementation.
(Partial Ordering of Function Templates? 
at least msvc doesn't suppot it)



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-11 12:58

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Some moments before your post I've checked in
an additional test. (more or less a copy paste 
of the gcc bug report) :)

> [... btw it's a bit annoying to compile 
> things in testwhen just making all, this 
> should be done during make check only]

This is not by accidient, by also building 
the tests we get more builds and thus (hopefully) 
more bug reports.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-11 12:35

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Alright, let's get it to fail:

$ wget http://belnet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/loki-
lib/loki-0.1.5.tar.gz
$ tar xfz loki-0.1.5.tar.gz
$ cd loki-0.1.5 && make
[... btw it's a bit annoying to compile things in test/ 
when just making all, this should be done during make check 
only]
make[2]: Entering directory `/tmp/loki/loki-0.1.5/test/
SmartPtr'
g++ -Wall -Wold-style-cast -Wundef -Wsign-compare -
Wconversion -Wpointer-arith -pedantic -g -O2 -I../../
include -DNDEBUG  -c -o main.o main.cpp
main.cpp:50:2: warning: #warning is a GCC extension
main.cpp:50:2: warning: #warning The warnings are by 
design: Check if SmartPtr can be used with a forward-
reference.
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h: In member function 'void 
Loki::DefaultSPStorage<T>::Destroy() [with T = Thingy]':
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:1064:   instantiated from 
'Loki::SmartPtr<T, OwnershipPolicy, ConversionPolicy, 
CheckingPolicy, StoragePolicy, 
ConstnessPolicy>::~SmartPtr() [with T = Thingy, 
OwnershipPolicy = Loki::RefCounted, ConversionPolicy = 
Loki::DisallowConversion, CheckingPolicy = 
Loki::AssertCheck, StoragePolicy = Loki::DefaultSPStorage, 
ConstnessPolicy = Loki::PropagateConst]'
main.cpp:985:   instantiated from here
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: warning: possible 
problem detected in invocation of delete operator:
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: warning: invalid use of 
undefined type 'struct Thingy'
main.cpp:47: warning: forward declaration of 'struct Thingy'
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: note: neither the 
destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be 
called, even if they are declared when the class is defined.
[...]
$ vim test.cc
[...]
$ cat -n test.cc
     1  /*
     2  ** test.cc for Project in /tmp/loki/loki-0.1.5
     3  **
     4  ** Made by SIGOURE Benoit
     5  ** Mail   <sigoure.benoit@...>
     6  **
     7  ** Started on  Wed 11 Oct 2006 12:30:53 PM CEST 
SIGOURE Benoit
     8  ** Last update Wed 11 Oct 2006 12:32:44 PM CEST 
SIGOURE Benoit
     9  */
    10
    11  #include "SmartPtr.h"
    12
    13  struct Foo
    14  {
    15    void AddRef ()
    16    {
    17    }
    18
    19    void Release ()
    20    {
    21    }
    22  };
    23
    24  int main ()
    25  {
    26    // COMRefCounted has the advantage to only use 
headers.
    27    Loki::SmartPtr<Foo, Loki::COMRefCounted> sp;
    28    Foo* p = Loki::GetImpl (sp);
    29  }
$ ~/work/cxx/test_cxx.sh -c test.cc -I./include/
loki                                 
List of C++ compilers to test: g++-2.95 g++-3.3 g++-3.4 g++-
4.0 g++-4.1

Testing with g++-2.95 version 2.95.4
$ g++-2.95 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
In file included from include/loki/SmallObj.h:24,
                 from include/loki/SmartPtr.h:33,
                 from test.cc:11:
include/loki/Singleton.h: In function `static void 
Loki::FollowIntoDeath::With<Lifetime>::AsMasterLifetime<Master>::ScheduleDestruction(Master
 *, void (*)())':
include/loki/Singleton.h:656: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: ANSI C++ forbids declaration 
`' with no type
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h: In function `static void 
Loki::FollowIntoDeath::AfterMaster<Master>::IsDestroyed<F>::ScheduleDestruction(F
 *, void (*)())':
include/loki/Singleton.h:686: `Followers' is not a template
test.cc: In function `int main()':
test.cc:28: `GetImpl' undeclared in namespace `Loki'
Compilation finished, g++-2.95 returned 1

Testing with g++-3.3 version g++-3.3 (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 
1:3.3.6-13)
$ g++-3.3 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-3.3 returned 0

Testing with g++-3.4 version g++-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Debian 
3.4.6-4)
$ g++-3.4 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-3.4 returned 0

Testing with g++-4.0 version g++-4.0 (GCC) 4.0.4 20060507 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.0.3-3)
$ g++-4.0 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-4.0 returned 0

Testing with g++-4.1 version g++-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.2 20060901 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)
$ g++-4.1 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
test.cc: In function 'int main()':
test.cc:28: error: 'GetImpl' is not a member of 'Loki'
Compilation finished, g++-4.1 returned 1



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-10 23:31

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've tested the Loki examples with 4.1.0 and 
4.2.0 and could not reproduce the error.

So, do you see the problem while compiling Loki, 
or when you compile your own code?





----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-06 14:19

Message:
Logged In: NO 

AFAIK I did not let any "friend" keyword at _definition_.

By the way, I'm sorry for the bad quality of the copy/paste 
on sourceforge (I've lost my password and email address and 
can't recover my SourceForge account ATM).

The patch is available at https://www.tsunanet.net/~tsuna/
loki-friends.patch

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-05 21:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Thanks, the support of GCC is a must.

Your patch looks good, but isn't "friend" 
at the definition superfluously?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-04 17:48

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Here is a proposal patch. I only tested the SmartPtr stuff, not the rest. Better 
test it before committing in the trunk :)

Index: ChangeLog
===============================================
====================
--- ChangeLog	(revision 29)
+++ ChangeLog	(revision 30)
@@ -1,5 +1,21 @@
 2006-10-04  SIGOURE Benoit  <sigoure.benoit@...>
 
+	Fix Loki.
+        Loki was using injected friends which is not standard. GCC 4.1 thus
+        reports an error. Friends are now declared in the class and defined
+        outside the class (actually, after the class). The bug was reported
+        to Loki at
+      http://sf.net/tracker/?
func=detail&aid=1570582&group_id=29557&atid=396644
+        and this patch was submitted to Loki's developers.
+        See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597)
+
+	* loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h: Fix friends.
+
+2006-10-04  SIGOURE Benoit  <sigoure.benoit@...>
+
 	Escape output for XML.
 
 	* behavior-graphs/tests/simple.cc: Test the escape.
Index: loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h	(revision 30)
@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@
 // * iterators are random
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template
     <
         class K,
@@ -288,33 +289,64 @@
             const MyCompare& me = *this;
             return std::equal_range(begin(), end(), k, me);
         }
-        
-        friend bool operator==(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        {
-            const Base& me = lhs;
-            return me == rhs;
-        } 
 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator==(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                        const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
+
         bool operator<(const AssocVector& rhs) const
         {
             const Base& me = *this;
             const Base& yo = rhs;
             return me < yo;
-        } 
+        }
 
-        friend bool operator!=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(lhs == rhs); } 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator!=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator>(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& rhs)
-        { return rhs < lhs; }
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator>(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                              const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator>=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(lhs < rhs); } 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator>=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator<=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(rhs < lhs); }
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator<=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
     };
 
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator==(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    {
+      const std::vector<std::pair<K, V>, A>& me = lhs;
+      return me == rhs;
+    }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator!=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(lhs == rhs); }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator>(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                          const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return rhs < lhs; }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator>=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(lhs < rhs); }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator<=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(rhs < lhs); }
+
+
     // specialized algorithms:
     template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
     void swap(AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs, AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
Index: loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h	(revision 30)
@@ -751,6 +751,7 @@
 ///  \param ConstnessPolicy  default = LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
 template
 <
     typename T,
@@ -935,33 +936,33 @@
         }
     }
 
-    friend bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr & sp,
-        typename StrongPtr::StoredType & p )
-    {
-        if ( !sp.RP::OnReleaseAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
-        {
-            return false;
-        }
-        p = sp.GetPointer();
-        sp.OP::SetPointer( sp.DP::Default() );
-        return true;
-    }
+    template
+    <
+        typename T1,
+        bool S1,
+        class OP1,
+        class CP1,
+        template < class > class KP1,
+        template < class > class RP1,
+        template < class > class DP1,
+        template < class > class CNP1
+    >
+    friend bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
> & sp,
+        typename StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
>::StoredType & p );
 
-    friend bool ResetAll( StrongPtr & sp,
-        typename StrongPtr::StoredType p )
-    {
-        if ( sp.OP::GetPointer() == p )
-        {
-            return true;
-        }
-        if ( !sp.RP::OnResetAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
-        {
-            return false;
-        }
-        sp.DP::Delete( sp.GetPointer() );
-        sp.OP::SetPointer( p );
-        return true;
-    }
+    template
+    <
+        typename T1,
+        bool S1,
+        class OP1,
+        class CP1,
+        template < class > class KP1,
+        template < class > class RP1,
+        template < class > class DP1,
+        template < class > class CNP1
+    >
+    friend bool ResetAll( StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 > 
& sp,
+        typename StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
>::StoredType p );
 
     /** Merges ownership of two StrongPtr's that point to same shared object
       but are not copointers.  Requires Merge function in OwnershipPolicy.
@@ -1191,7 +1192,7 @@
     typedef typename Select< CP::allow, PointerType, Insipid >::Result
         AutomaticConversionResult;
 
-public:        
+public:
     operator AutomaticConversionResult() const
     {
         return GetPointer();
@@ -1199,6 +1200,58 @@
 
 };
 
+template
+<
+    typename U,
+    typename T,
+    bool S,
+    class OP,
+    class CP,
+    template < class > class KP,
+    template < class > class RP,
+    template < class > class DP,
+    template < class > class CNP
+>
+bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP > & sp,
+                 typename StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP >::StoredType 
& p )
+{
+  if ( !sp.RP<T>::OnReleaseAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
+  {
+    return false;
+  }
+  p = sp.GetPointer();
+  sp.OP::SetPointer( sp.DP<T>::Default() );
+  return true;
+}
+
+template
+<
+    typename U,
+    typename T,
+    bool S,
+    class OP,
+    class CP,
+    template < class > class KP,
+    template < class > class RP,
+    template < class > class DP,
+    template < class > class CNP
+>
+bool ResetAll( StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP > & sp,
+               typename StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP >::StoredType 
p )
+{
+  if ( sp.OP::GetPointer() == p )
+  {
+    return true;
+  }
+  if ( !sp.RP<T>::OnResetAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
+  {
+    return false;
+  }
+  sp.DP<T>::Delete( sp.GetPointer() );
+  sp.OP::SetPointer( p );
+  return true;
+}
+
 // 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
 
 // free comparison operators for class template StrongPtr
Index: loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h	(revision 30)
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@
 ///   to T's destructor followed by call to free.
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class HeapStorage
     {
@@ -85,15 +86,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename HeapStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
HeapStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename HeapStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const HeapStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename HeapStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(HeapStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -115,6 +116,19 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename HeapStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename HeapStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef(const 
HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename HeapStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class DefaultSPStorage
 ///
@@ -122,6 +136,7 @@
 ///  Implementation of the StoragePolicy used by SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class DefaultSPStorage
     {
@@ -152,15 +167,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const DefaultSPStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const DefaultSPStorage& 
sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(DefaultSPStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -178,6 +193,18 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
     
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class ArrayStorage
@@ -186,6 +213,7 @@
 ///  Implementation of the ArrayStorage used by SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class ArrayStorage
     {
@@ -216,15 +244,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename ArrayStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename ArrayStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename ArrayStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -240,7 +268,19 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename ArrayStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename ArrayStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef(const 
ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename ArrayStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class RefCounted
 ///
@@ -1064,15 +1104,6 @@
                 SP::Destroy();
             }
         }
-        
-        friend inline void Release(SmartPtr& sp, typename SP::StoredType& p)
-        {
-            p = GetImplRef(sp);
-            GetImplRef(sp) = SP::Default();
-        }
-        
-        friend inline void Reset(SmartPtr& sp, typename SP::StoredType p)
-        { SmartPtr(p).Swap(sp); }
 
         template
         <
@@ -1083,6 +1114,32 @@
             template <class> class SP1,
             template <class> class CNP1
         >
+        friend void Release(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1>& sp,
+                            typename SP1<T>::StoredType& p);
+
+        template
+        <
+            typename T1,
+            template <class> class OP1,
+            class CP1,
+            template <class> class KP1,
+            template <class> class SP1,
+            template <class> class CNP1
+        >
+        friend void Reset(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1>& sp,
+                          typename SP1<T>::StoredType p);
+
+
+
+        template
+        <
+            typename T1,
+            template <class> class OP1,
+            class CP1,
+            template <class> class KP1,
+            template <class> class SP1,
+            template <class> class CNP1
+        >
         bool Merge( SmartPtr< T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1 > & rhs )
         {
             if ( GetImpl( *this ) != GetImpl( rhs ) )
@@ -1241,6 +1298,37 @@
         { return GetImpl(*this); }
     };
 
+    template
+    <
+        typename T,
+        template <class> class OP,
+        class CP,
+        template <class> class KP,
+        template <class> class SP,
+        template <class> class CNP1,
+        typename U
+    >
+    inline void Release(SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>& sp,
+                        typename SP<T>::StoredType& p)
+    {
+      p = GetImplRef(sp);
+      GetImplRef(sp) = SP<T>::Default();
+    }
+
+    template
+    <
+        typename T,
+        template <class> class OP,
+        class CP,
+        template <class> class KP,
+        template <class> class SP,
+        template <class> class CNP1,
+        typename U
+    >
+    inline void Reset(SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>& sp,
+                      typename SP<T>::StoredType p)
+    { SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>(p).Swap(sp); }
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 // free comparison operators for class template SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
Index: loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h	(revision 30)
@@ -110,15 +110,15 @@
         PrototypeFactoryUnit(AbstractProduct* p = 0)
             : pPrototype_(p)
         {}
-        
-        friend void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit& me,
-            AbstractProduct*& pPrototype)
-        { pPrototype = me.pPrototype_; }
-        
-        friend void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit& me, 
-            AbstractProduct* pObj)
-        { me.pPrototype_ = pObj; }
-        
+
+        template <class CP, class B>
+        friend void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                                   typename Base::ProductList::Head*& pPrototype);
+
+        template <class CP, class B>
+        friend void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                                   typename Base::ProductList::Head* pObj);
+
         template <class U>
         void GetPrototype(U*& p)
         { return DoGetPrototype(*this, p); }
@@ -137,6 +137,16 @@
         AbstractProduct* pPrototype_;
     };
 
+    template <class CP, class B>
+    inline void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                               typename Base::ProductList::Head*& pPrototype)
+    { pPrototype = me.pPrototype_; }
+
+    template <class CP, class B>
+    inline void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                               typename Base::ProductList::Head* pObj)
+    { me.pPrototype_ = pObj; }
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 // class template ConcreteFactory
 // Implements an AbstractFactory interface


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1570582&group_id=29557

Bugs item #1570582, was opened at 2006-10-04 03:13
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nobody
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1570582&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 8
Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Assigned to: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Summary: Loki won't compile on GCC4.1 because of injected friends.

Initial Comment:
Loki uses injected friends which won't work since GCC 4.1:

===========================================
=================
struct foo
{
  friend void bar ()
  {
  }
};

int main ()
{
  bar ();
}
===========================================
=================

===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-2.95 version 2.95.4
$ g++-2.95 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-2.95 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-3.3 version g++-3.3 (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 
1:3.3.6-13)
$ g++-3.3 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-3.3 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-3.4 version g++-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Debian 3.4.6-4)
$ g++-3.4 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-3.4 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-4.0 version g++-4.0 (GCC) 4.0.4 20060507 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.0.3-3)
$ g++-4.0 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-4.0 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-4.1 version g++-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.2 20060901 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)
$ g++-4.1 -c friend.cc
friend.cc: In function 'int main()':
friend.cc:10: error: 'bar' was not declared in this scope
Compilation finished, g++-4.1 returned 1
===========================================
=================

See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-19 05:22

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Hum yeah this FAQ entry is very useful and makes it clear 
as to how these tricky things must be written. Could you 
post the final diff/patch that will be applied to Loki 
please?

If you haven't written it already, I can write it (and post 
it) for you.

Regards,
Benoit Sigoure.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-18 12:18

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

See also the FAQ about friends

http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#friend


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-17 03:26

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

It's a compiler bug (msvc and all gcc versions, 
maybe 4.2 has fixed it):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29486

- test code added
- workaround added to enable the old in-class-definitions
- GCC 4.1 maybe works with -ffriend-injection 
  (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-16 09:55

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've tried also to patch StrongPtr, but without success.

All compilers (msvc, gcc 3.4, 4.2) couldn't resolve a
ambiguity of ReleaseAll (after removing the wrong 
"typename U" template parameter). 

Seems this hits a compiler limit; maybe because of
an incomplete std implementation.
(Partial Ordering of Function Templates? 
at least msvc doesn't suppot it)



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-11 03:58

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Some moments before your post I've checked in
an additional test. (more or less a copy paste 
of the gcc bug report) :)

> [... btw it's a bit annoying to compile 
> things in testwhen just making all, this 
> should be done during make check only]

This is not by accidient, by also building 
the tests we get more builds and thus (hopefully) 
more bug reports.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-11 03:35

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Alright, let's get it to fail:

$ wget http://belnet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/loki-
lib/loki-0.1.5.tar.gz
$ tar xfz loki-0.1.5.tar.gz
$ cd loki-0.1.5 && make
[... btw it's a bit annoying to compile things in test/ 
when just making all, this should be done during make check 
only]
make[2]: Entering directory `/tmp/loki/loki-0.1.5/test/
SmartPtr'
g++ -Wall -Wold-style-cast -Wundef -Wsign-compare -
Wconversion -Wpointer-arith -pedantic -g -O2 -I../../
include -DNDEBUG  -c -o main.o main.cpp
main.cpp:50:2: warning: #warning is a GCC extension
main.cpp:50:2: warning: #warning The warnings are by 
design: Check if SmartPtr can be used with a forward-
reference.
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h: In member function 'void 
Loki::DefaultSPStorage<T>::Destroy() [with T = Thingy]':
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:1064:   instantiated from 
'Loki::SmartPtr<T, OwnershipPolicy, ConversionPolicy, 
CheckingPolicy, StoragePolicy, 
ConstnessPolicy>::~SmartPtr() [with T = Thingy, 
OwnershipPolicy = Loki::RefCounted, ConversionPolicy = 
Loki::DisallowConversion, CheckingPolicy = 
Loki::AssertCheck, StoragePolicy = Loki::DefaultSPStorage, 
ConstnessPolicy = Loki::PropagateConst]'
main.cpp:985:   instantiated from here
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: warning: possible 
problem detected in invocation of delete operator:
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: warning: invalid use of 
undefined type 'struct Thingy'
main.cpp:47: warning: forward declaration of 'struct Thingy'
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: note: neither the 
destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be 
called, even if they are declared when the class is defined.
[...]
$ vim test.cc
[...]
$ cat -n test.cc
     1  /*
     2  ** test.cc for Project in /tmp/loki/loki-0.1.5
     3  **
     4  ** Made by SIGOURE Benoit
     5  ** Mail   <sigoure.benoit@...>
     6  **
     7  ** Started on  Wed 11 Oct 2006 12:30:53 PM CEST 
SIGOURE Benoit
     8  ** Last update Wed 11 Oct 2006 12:32:44 PM CEST 
SIGOURE Benoit
     9  */
    10
    11  #include "SmartPtr.h"
    12
    13  struct Foo
    14  {
    15    void AddRef ()
    16    {
    17    }
    18
    19    void Release ()
    20    {
    21    }
    22  };
    23
    24  int main ()
    25  {
    26    // COMRefCounted has the advantage to only use 
headers.
    27    Loki::SmartPtr<Foo, Loki::COMRefCounted> sp;
    28    Foo* p = Loki::GetImpl (sp);
    29  }
$ ~/work/cxx/test_cxx.sh -c test.cc -I./include/
loki                                 
List of C++ compilers to test: g++-2.95 g++-3.3 g++-3.4 g++-
4.0 g++-4.1

Testing with g++-2.95 version 2.95.4
$ g++-2.95 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
In file included from include/loki/SmallObj.h:24,
                 from include/loki/SmartPtr.h:33,
                 from test.cc:11:
include/loki/Singleton.h: In function `static void 
Loki::FollowIntoDeath::With<Lifetime>::AsMasterLifetime<Master>::ScheduleDestruction(Master
 *, void (*)())':
include/loki/Singleton.h:656: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: ANSI C++ forbids declaration 
`' with no type
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h: In function `static void 
Loki::FollowIntoDeath::AfterMaster<Master>::IsDestroyed<F>::ScheduleDestruction(F
 *, void (*)())':
include/loki/Singleton.h:686: `Followers' is not a template
test.cc: In function `int main()':
test.cc:28: `GetImpl' undeclared in namespace `Loki'
Compilation finished, g++-2.95 returned 1

Testing with g++-3.3 version g++-3.3 (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 
1:3.3.6-13)
$ g++-3.3 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-3.3 returned 0

Testing with g++-3.4 version g++-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Debian 
3.4.6-4)
$ g++-3.4 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-3.4 returned 0

Testing with g++-4.0 version g++-4.0 (GCC) 4.0.4 20060507 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.0.3-3)
$ g++-4.0 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-4.0 returned 0

Testing with g++-4.1 version g++-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.2 20060901 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)
$ g++-4.1 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
test.cc: In function 'int main()':
test.cc:28: error: 'GetImpl' is not a member of 'Loki'
Compilation finished, g++-4.1 returned 1



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-10 14:31

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've tested the Loki examples with 4.1.0 and 
4.2.0 and could not reproduce the error.

So, do you see the problem while compiling Loki, 
or when you compile your own code?





----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-06 05:19

Message:
Logged In: NO 

AFAIK I did not let any "friend" keyword at _definition_.

By the way, I'm sorry for the bad quality of the copy/paste 
on sourceforge (I've lost my password and email address and 
can't recover my SourceForge account ATM).

The patch is available at https://www.tsunanet.net/~tsuna/
loki-friends.patch

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-05 12:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Thanks, the support of GCC is a must.

Your patch looks good, but isn't "friend" 
at the definition superfluously?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-04 08:48

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Here is a proposal patch. I only tested the SmartPtr stuff, not the rest. Better 
test it before committing in the trunk :)

Index: ChangeLog
===============================================
====================
--- ChangeLog	(revision 29)
+++ ChangeLog	(revision 30)
@@ -1,5 +1,21 @@
 2006-10-04  SIGOURE Benoit  <sigoure.benoit@...>
 
+	Fix Loki.
+        Loki was using injected friends which is not standard. GCC 4.1 thus
+        reports an error. Friends are now declared in the class and defined
+        outside the class (actually, after the class). The bug was reported
+        to Loki at
+      http://sf.net/tracker/?
func=detail&aid=1570582&group_id=29557&atid=396644
+        and this patch was submitted to Loki's developers.
+        See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597)
+
+	* loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h: Fix friends.
+
+2006-10-04  SIGOURE Benoit  <sigoure.benoit@...>
+
 	Escape output for XML.
 
 	* behavior-graphs/tests/simple.cc: Test the escape.
Index: loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h	(revision 30)
@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@
 // * iterators are random
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template
     <
         class K,
@@ -288,33 +289,64 @@
             const MyCompare& me = *this;
             return std::equal_range(begin(), end(), k, me);
         }
-        
-        friend bool operator==(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        {
-            const Base& me = lhs;
-            return me == rhs;
-        } 
 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator==(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                        const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
+
         bool operator<(const AssocVector& rhs) const
         {
             const Base& me = *this;
             const Base& yo = rhs;
             return me < yo;
-        } 
+        }
 
-        friend bool operator!=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(lhs == rhs); } 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator!=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator>(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& rhs)
-        { return rhs < lhs; }
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator>(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                              const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator>=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(lhs < rhs); } 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator>=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator<=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(rhs < lhs); }
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator<=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
     };
 
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator==(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    {
+      const std::vector<std::pair<K, V>, A>& me = lhs;
+      return me == rhs;
+    }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator!=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(lhs == rhs); }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator>(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                          const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return rhs < lhs; }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator>=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(lhs < rhs); }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator<=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(rhs < lhs); }
+
+
     // specialized algorithms:
     template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
     void swap(AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs, AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
Index: loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h	(revision 30)
@@ -751,6 +751,7 @@
 ///  \param ConstnessPolicy  default = LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
 template
 <
     typename T,
@@ -935,33 +936,33 @@
         }
     }
 
-    friend bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr & sp,
-        typename StrongPtr::StoredType & p )
-    {
-        if ( !sp.RP::OnReleaseAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
-        {
-            return false;
-        }
-        p = sp.GetPointer();
-        sp.OP::SetPointer( sp.DP::Default() );
-        return true;
-    }
+    template
+    <
+        typename T1,
+        bool S1,
+        class OP1,
+        class CP1,
+        template < class > class KP1,
+        template < class > class RP1,
+        template < class > class DP1,
+        template < class > class CNP1
+    >
+    friend bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
> & sp,
+        typename StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
>::StoredType & p );
 
-    friend bool ResetAll( StrongPtr & sp,
-        typename StrongPtr::StoredType p )
-    {
-        if ( sp.OP::GetPointer() == p )
-        {
-            return true;
-        }
-        if ( !sp.RP::OnResetAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
-        {
-            return false;
-        }
-        sp.DP::Delete( sp.GetPointer() );
-        sp.OP::SetPointer( p );
-        return true;
-    }
+    template
+    <
+        typename T1,
+        bool S1,
+        class OP1,
+        class CP1,
+        template < class > class KP1,
+        template < class > class RP1,
+        template < class > class DP1,
+        template < class > class CNP1
+    >
+    friend bool ResetAll( StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 > 
& sp,
+        typename StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
>::StoredType p );
 
     /** Merges ownership of two StrongPtr's that point to same shared object
       but are not copointers.  Requires Merge function in OwnershipPolicy.
@@ -1191,7 +1192,7 @@
     typedef typename Select< CP::allow, PointerType, Insipid >::Result
         AutomaticConversionResult;
 
-public:        
+public:
     operator AutomaticConversionResult() const
     {
         return GetPointer();
@@ -1199,6 +1200,58 @@
 
 };
 
+template
+<
+    typename U,
+    typename T,
+    bool S,
+    class OP,
+    class CP,
+    template < class > class KP,
+    template < class > class RP,
+    template < class > class DP,
+    template < class > class CNP
+>
+bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP > & sp,
+                 typename StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP >::StoredType 
& p )
+{
+  if ( !sp.RP<T>::OnReleaseAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
+  {
+    return false;
+  }
+  p = sp.GetPointer();
+  sp.OP::SetPointer( sp.DP<T>::Default() );
+  return true;
+}
+
+template
+<
+    typename U,
+    typename T,
+    bool S,
+    class OP,
+    class CP,
+    template < class > class KP,
+    template < class > class RP,
+    template < class > class DP,
+    template < class > class CNP
+>
+bool ResetAll( StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP > & sp,
+               typename StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP >::StoredType 
p )
+{
+  if ( sp.OP::GetPointer() == p )
+  {
+    return true;
+  }
+  if ( !sp.RP<T>::OnResetAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
+  {
+    return false;
+  }
+  sp.DP<T>::Delete( sp.GetPointer() );
+  sp.OP::SetPointer( p );
+  return true;
+}
+
 // 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
 
 // free comparison operators for class template StrongPtr
Index: loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h	(revision 30)
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@
 ///   to T's destructor followed by call to free.
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class HeapStorage
     {
@@ -85,15 +86,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename HeapStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
HeapStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename HeapStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const HeapStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename HeapStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(HeapStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -115,6 +116,19 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename HeapStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename HeapStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef(const 
HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename HeapStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class DefaultSPStorage
 ///
@@ -122,6 +136,7 @@
 ///  Implementation of the StoragePolicy used by SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class DefaultSPStorage
     {
@@ -152,15 +167,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const DefaultSPStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const DefaultSPStorage& 
sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(DefaultSPStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -178,6 +193,18 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
     
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class ArrayStorage
@@ -186,6 +213,7 @@
 ///  Implementation of the ArrayStorage used by SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class ArrayStorage
     {
@@ -216,15 +244,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename ArrayStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename ArrayStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename ArrayStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -240,7 +268,19 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename ArrayStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename ArrayStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef(const 
ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename ArrayStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class RefCounted
 ///
@@ -1064,15 +1104,6 @@
                 SP::Destroy();
             }
         }
-        
-        friend inline void Release(SmartPtr& sp, typename SP::StoredType& p)
-        {
-            p = GetImplRef(sp);
-            GetImplRef(sp) = SP::Default();
-        }
-        
-        friend inline void Reset(SmartPtr& sp, typename SP::StoredType p)
-        { SmartPtr(p).Swap(sp); }
 
         template
         <
@@ -1083,6 +1114,32 @@
             template <class> class SP1,
             template <class> class CNP1
         >
+        friend void Release(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1>& sp,
+                            typename SP1<T>::StoredType& p);
+
+        template
+        <
+            typename T1,
+            template <class> class OP1,
+            class CP1,
+            template <class> class KP1,
+            template <class> class SP1,
+            template <class> class CNP1
+        >
+        friend void Reset(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1>& sp,
+                          typename SP1<T>::StoredType p);
+
+
+
+        template
+        <
+            typename T1,
+            template <class> class OP1,
+            class CP1,
+            template <class> class KP1,
+            template <class> class SP1,
+            template <class> class CNP1
+        >
         bool Merge( SmartPtr< T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1 > & rhs )
         {
             if ( GetImpl( *this ) != GetImpl( rhs ) )
@@ -1241,6 +1298,37 @@
         { return GetImpl(*this); }
     };
 
+    template
+    <
+        typename T,
+        template <class> class OP,
+        class CP,
+        template <class> class KP,
+        template <class> class SP,
+        template <class> class CNP1,
+        typename U
+    >
+    inline void Release(SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>& sp,
+                        typename SP<T>::StoredType& p)
+    {
+      p = GetImplRef(sp);
+      GetImplRef(sp) = SP<T>::Default();
+    }
+
+    template
+    <
+        typename T,
+        template <class> class OP,
+        class CP,
+        template <class> class KP,
+        template <class> class SP,
+        template <class> class CNP1,
+        typename U
+    >
+    inline void Reset(SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>& sp,
+                      typename SP<T>::StoredType p)
+    { SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>(p).Swap(sp); }
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 // free comparison operators for class template SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
Index: loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h	(revision 30)
@@ -110,15 +110,15 @@
         PrototypeFactoryUnit(AbstractProduct* p = 0)
             : pPrototype_(p)
         {}
-        
-        friend void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit& me,
-            AbstractProduct*& pPrototype)
-        { pPrototype = me.pPrototype_; }
-        
-        friend void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit& me, 
-            AbstractProduct* pObj)
-        { me.pPrototype_ = pObj; }
-        
+
+        template <class CP, class B>
+        friend void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                                   typename Base::ProductList::Head*& pPrototype);
+
+        template <class CP, class B>
+        friend void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                                   typename Base::ProductList::Head* pObj);
+
         template <class U>
         void GetPrototype(U*& p)
         { return DoGetPrototype(*this, p); }
@@ -137,6 +137,16 @@
         AbstractProduct* pPrototype_;
     };
 
+    template <class CP, class B>
+    inline void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                               typename Base::ProductList::Head*& pPrototype)
+    { pPrototype = me.pPrototype_; }
+
+    template <class CP, class B>
+    inline void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                               typename Base::ProductList::Head* pObj)
+    { me.pPrototype_ = pObj; }
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 // class template ConcreteFactory
 // Implements an AbstractFactory interface


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1570582&group_id=29557

Bugs item #1570582, was opened at 2006-10-04 12:13
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by syntheticpp
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1570582&group_id=29557

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread,
including the initial issue submission, for this request,
not just the latest update.
Category: None
Group: None
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 8
Submitted By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Assigned to: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Summary: Loki won't compile on GCC4.1 because of injected friends.

Initial Comment:
Loki uses injected friends which won't work since GCC 4.1:

===========================================
=================
struct foo
{
  friend void bar ()
  {
  }
};

int main ()
{
  bar ();
}
===========================================
=================

===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-2.95 version 2.95.4
$ g++-2.95 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-2.95 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-3.3 version g++-3.3 (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 
1:3.3.6-13)
$ g++-3.3 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-3.3 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-3.4 version g++-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Debian 3.4.6-4)
$ g++-3.4 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-3.4 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-4.0 version g++-4.0 (GCC) 4.0.4 20060507 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.0.3-3)
$ g++-4.0 -c friend.cc
Compilation finished, g++-4.0 returned 0
===========================================
=================
Testing with g++-4.1 version g++-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.2 20060901 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)
$ g++-4.1 -c friend.cc
friend.cc: In function 'int main()':
friend.cc:10: error: 'bar' was not declared in this scope
Compilation finished, g++-4.1 returned 1
===========================================
=================

See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-19 16:05

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

All your patches are already in svn (we've migrated to svn)
now (with small corrections).
But despite of the missing forward declarations I get
no errors when compiling Loki, maybe the friend functions 
are not used by the loki code.

An other thing is that I could compile tests/SmartPtr
with gcc 4.2 and the old injected friend code without
errors, which I don't understand, because the old code
should not compile without the  -ffriend-injection option.

I think we could postpone the forward declaration of 
the smart pointer friend functions until gcc could 
handle it, currently gcc is to buggy on this issue.

Could you test the svn version of Loki with your 
code and gcc 4.1? 

Peter


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-19 14:22

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Hum yeah this FAQ entry is very useful and makes it clear 
as to how these tricky things must be written. Could you 
post the final diff/patch that will be applied to Loki 
please?

If you haven't written it already, I can write it (and post 
it) for you.

Regards,
Benoit Sigoure.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-18 21:18

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

See also the FAQ about friends

http://gcc.gnu.org/faq.html#friend


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-17 12:26

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

It's a compiler bug (msvc and all gcc versions, 
maybe 4.2 has fixed it):
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29486

- test code added
- workaround added to enable the old in-class-definitions
- GCC 4.1 maybe works with -ffriend-injection 
  (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-16 18:55

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've tried also to patch StrongPtr, but without success.

All compilers (msvc, gcc 3.4, 4.2) couldn't resolve a
ambiguity of ReleaseAll (after removing the wrong 
"typename U" template parameter). 

Seems this hits a compiler limit; maybe because of
an incomplete std implementation.
(Partial Ordering of Function Templates? 
at least msvc doesn't suppot it)



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-11 12:58

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Some moments before your post I've checked in
an additional test. (more or less a copy paste 
of the gcc bug report) :)

> [... btw it's a bit annoying to compile 
> things in testwhen just making all, this 
> should be done during make check only]

This is not by accidient, by also building 
the tests we get more builds and thus (hopefully) 
more bug reports.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-11 12:35

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Alright, let's get it to fail:

$ wget http://belnet.dl.sourceforge.net/sourceforge/loki-
lib/loki-0.1.5.tar.gz
$ tar xfz loki-0.1.5.tar.gz
$ cd loki-0.1.5 && make
[... btw it's a bit annoying to compile things in test/ 
when just making all, this should be done during make check 
only]
make[2]: Entering directory `/tmp/loki/loki-0.1.5/test/
SmartPtr'
g++ -Wall -Wold-style-cast -Wundef -Wsign-compare -
Wconversion -Wpointer-arith -pedantic -g -O2 -I../../
include -DNDEBUG  -c -o main.o main.cpp
main.cpp:50:2: warning: #warning is a GCC extension
main.cpp:50:2: warning: #warning The warnings are by 
design: Check if SmartPtr can be used with a forward-
reference.
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h: In member function 'void 
Loki::DefaultSPStorage<T>::Destroy() [with T = Thingy]':
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:1064:   instantiated from 
'Loki::SmartPtr<T, OwnershipPolicy, ConversionPolicy, 
CheckingPolicy, StoragePolicy, 
ConstnessPolicy>::~SmartPtr() [with T = Thingy, 
OwnershipPolicy = Loki::RefCounted, ConversionPolicy = 
Loki::DisallowConversion, CheckingPolicy = 
Loki::AssertCheck, StoragePolicy = Loki::DefaultSPStorage, 
ConstnessPolicy = Loki::PropagateConst]'
main.cpp:985:   instantiated from here
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: warning: possible 
problem detected in invocation of delete operator:
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: warning: invalid use of 
undefined type 'struct Thingy'
main.cpp:47: warning: forward declaration of 'struct Thingy'
../../include/loki/SmartPtr.h:169: note: neither the 
destructor nor the class-specific operator delete will be 
called, even if they are declared when the class is defined.
[...]
$ vim test.cc
[...]
$ cat -n test.cc
     1  /*
     2  ** test.cc for Project in /tmp/loki/loki-0.1.5
     3  **
     4  ** Made by SIGOURE Benoit
     5  ** Mail   <sigoure.benoit@...>
     6  **
     7  ** Started on  Wed 11 Oct 2006 12:30:53 PM CEST 
SIGOURE Benoit
     8  ** Last update Wed 11 Oct 2006 12:32:44 PM CEST 
SIGOURE Benoit
     9  */
    10
    11  #include "SmartPtr.h"
    12
    13  struct Foo
    14  {
    15    void AddRef ()
    16    {
    17    }
    18
    19    void Release ()
    20    {
    21    }
    22  };
    23
    24  int main ()
    25  {
    26    // COMRefCounted has the advantage to only use 
headers.
    27    Loki::SmartPtr<Foo, Loki::COMRefCounted> sp;
    28    Foo* p = Loki::GetImpl (sp);
    29  }
$ ~/work/cxx/test_cxx.sh -c test.cc -I./include/
loki                                 
List of C++ compilers to test: g++-2.95 g++-3.3 g++-3.4 g++-
4.0 g++-4.1

Testing with g++-2.95 version 2.95.4
$ g++-2.95 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
In file included from include/loki/SmallObj.h:24,
                 from include/loki/SmartPtr.h:33,
                 from test.cc:11:
include/loki/Singleton.h: In function `static void 
Loki::FollowIntoDeath::With<Lifetime>::AsMasterLifetime<Master>::ScheduleDestruction(Master
 *, void (*)())':
include/loki/Singleton.h:656: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: ANSI C++ forbids declaration 
`' with no type
include/loki/Singleton.h:663: `Followers' is not a template
include/loki/Singleton.h: In function `static void 
Loki::FollowIntoDeath::AfterMaster<Master>::IsDestroyed<F>::ScheduleDestruction(F
 *, void (*)())':
include/loki/Singleton.h:686: `Followers' is not a template
test.cc: In function `int main()':
test.cc:28: `GetImpl' undeclared in namespace `Loki'
Compilation finished, g++-2.95 returned 1

Testing with g++-3.3 version g++-3.3 (GCC) 3.3.6 (Debian 
1:3.3.6-13)
$ g++-3.3 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-3.3 returned 0

Testing with g++-3.4 version g++-3.4 (GCC) 3.4.6 (Debian 
3.4.6-4)
$ g++-3.4 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-3.4 returned 0

Testing with g++-4.0 version g++-4.0 (GCC) 4.0.4 20060507 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.0.3-3)
$ g++-4.0 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
Compilation finished, g++-4.0 returned 0

Testing with g++-4.1 version g++-4.1 (GCC) 4.1.2 20060901 
(prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)
$ g++-4.1 -c test.cc -I./include/loki
test.cc: In function 'int main()':
test.cc:28: error: 'GetImpl' is not a member of 'Loki'
Compilation finished, g++-4.1 returned 1



----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-10 23:31

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

I've tested the Loki examples with 4.1.0 and 
4.2.0 and could not reproduce the error.

So, do you see the problem while compiling Loki, 
or when you compile your own code?





----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-06 14:19

Message:
Logged In: NO 

AFAIK I did not let any "friend" keyword at _definition_.

By the way, I'm sorry for the bad quality of the copy/paste 
on sourceforge (I've lost my password and email address and 
can't recover my SourceForge account ATM).

The patch is available at https://www.tsunanet.net/~tsuna/
loki-friends.patch

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Peter Kuemmel (syntheticpp)
Date: 2006-10-05 21:14

Message:
Logged In: YES 
user_id=1159765

Thanks, the support of GCC is a must.

Your patch looks good, but isn't "friend" 
at the definition superfluously?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Date: 2006-10-04 17:48

Message:
Logged In: NO 

Here is a proposal patch. I only tested the SmartPtr stuff, not the rest. Better 
test it before committing in the trunk :)

Index: ChangeLog
===============================================
====================
--- ChangeLog	(revision 29)
+++ ChangeLog	(revision 30)
@@ -1,5 +1,21 @@
 2006-10-04  SIGOURE Benoit  <sigoure.benoit@...>
 
+	Fix Loki.
+        Loki was using injected friends which is not standard. GCC 4.1 thus
+        reports an error. Friends are now declared in the class and defined
+        outside the class (actually, after the class). The bug was reported
+        to Loki at
+      http://sf.net/tracker/?
func=detail&aid=1570582&group_id=29557&atid=396644
+        and this patch was submitted to Loki's developers.
+        See http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28597)
+
+	* loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h,
+	* loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h: Fix friends.
+
+2006-10-04  SIGOURE Benoit  <sigoure.benoit@...>
+
 	Escape output for XML.
 
 	* behavior-graphs/tests/simple.cc: Test the escape.
Index: loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/AssocVector.h	(revision 30)
@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@
 // * iterators are random
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template
     <
         class K,
@@ -288,33 +289,64 @@
             const MyCompare& me = *this;
             return std::equal_range(begin(), end(), k, me);
         }
-        
-        friend bool operator==(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        {
-            const Base& me = lhs;
-            return me == rhs;
-        } 
 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator==(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                        const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
+
         bool operator<(const AssocVector& rhs) const
         {
             const Base& me = *this;
             const Base& yo = rhs;
             return me < yo;
-        } 
+        }
 
-        friend bool operator!=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(lhs == rhs); } 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator!=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator>(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& rhs)
-        { return rhs < lhs; }
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator>(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                              const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator>=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(lhs < rhs); } 
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator>=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
 
-        friend bool operator<=(const AssocVector& lhs, const AssocVector& 
rhs)
-        { return !(rhs < lhs); }
+        template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+        friend bool operator<=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                               const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs);
     };
 
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator==(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    {
+      const std::vector<std::pair<K, V>, A>& me = lhs;
+      return me == rhs;
+    }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator!=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(lhs == rhs); }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator>(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                          const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return rhs < lhs; }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator>=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(lhs < rhs); }
+
+    template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
+    inline bool operator<=(const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs,
+                           const AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
+    { return !(rhs < lhs); }
+
+
     // specialized algorithms:
     template <class K, class V, class C, class A>
     void swap(AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& lhs, AssocVector<K, V, C, A>& rhs)
Index: loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/StrongPtr.h	(revision 30)
@@ -751,6 +751,7 @@
 ///  \param ConstnessPolicy  default = LOKI_DEFAULT_CONSTNESS
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
 template
 <
     typename T,
@@ -935,33 +936,33 @@
         }
     }
 
-    friend bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr & sp,
-        typename StrongPtr::StoredType & p )
-    {
-        if ( !sp.RP::OnReleaseAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
-        {
-            return false;
-        }
-        p = sp.GetPointer();
-        sp.OP::SetPointer( sp.DP::Default() );
-        return true;
-    }
+    template
+    <
+        typename T1,
+        bool S1,
+        class OP1,
+        class CP1,
+        template < class > class KP1,
+        template < class > class RP1,
+        template < class > class DP1,
+        template < class > class CNP1
+    >
+    friend bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
> & sp,
+        typename StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
>::StoredType & p );
 
-    friend bool ResetAll( StrongPtr & sp,
-        typename StrongPtr::StoredType p )
-    {
-        if ( sp.OP::GetPointer() == p )
-        {
-            return true;
-        }
-        if ( !sp.RP::OnResetAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
-        {
-            return false;
-        }
-        sp.DP::Delete( sp.GetPointer() );
-        sp.OP::SetPointer( p );
-        return true;
-    }
+    template
+    <
+        typename T1,
+        bool S1,
+        class OP1,
+        class CP1,
+        template < class > class KP1,
+        template < class > class RP1,
+        template < class > class DP1,
+        template < class > class CNP1
+    >
+    friend bool ResetAll( StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 > 
& sp,
+        typename StrongPtr< T1, S1, OP1, CP1, KP1, RP1, DP1, CNP1 
>::StoredType p );
 
     /** Merges ownership of two StrongPtr's that point to same shared object
       but are not copointers.  Requires Merge function in OwnershipPolicy.
@@ -1191,7 +1192,7 @@
     typedef typename Select< CP::allow, PointerType, Insipid >::Result
         AutomaticConversionResult;
 
-public:        
+public:
     operator AutomaticConversionResult() const
     {
         return GetPointer();
@@ -1199,6 +1200,58 @@
 
 };
 
+template
+<
+    typename U,
+    typename T,
+    bool S,
+    class OP,
+    class CP,
+    template < class > class KP,
+    template < class > class RP,
+    template < class > class DP,
+    template < class > class CNP
+>
+bool ReleaseAll( StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP > & sp,
+                 typename StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP >::StoredType 
& p )
+{
+  if ( !sp.RP<T>::OnReleaseAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
+  {
+    return false;
+  }
+  p = sp.GetPointer();
+  sp.OP::SetPointer( sp.DP<T>::Default() );
+  return true;
+}
+
+template
+<
+    typename U,
+    typename T,
+    bool S,
+    class OP,
+    class CP,
+    template < class > class KP,
+    template < class > class RP,
+    template < class > class DP,
+    template < class > class CNP
+>
+bool ResetAll( StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP > & sp,
+               typename StrongPtr< T, S, OP, CP, KP, RP, DP, CNP >::StoredType 
p )
+{
+  if ( sp.OP::GetPointer() == p )
+  {
+    return true;
+  }
+  if ( !sp.RP<T>::OnResetAll( sp.IsStrong() || sp.OP::HasStrongPointer() ) )
+  {
+    return false;
+  }
+  sp.DP<T>::Delete( sp.GetPointer() );
+  sp.OP::SetPointer( p );
+  return true;
+}
+
 // 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
 
 // free comparison operators for class template StrongPtr
Index: loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/SmartPtr.h	(revision 30)
@@ -55,6 +55,7 @@
 ///   to T's destructor followed by call to free.
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class HeapStorage
     {
@@ -85,15 +86,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename HeapStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
HeapStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(HeapStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename HeapStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const HeapStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename HeapStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(HeapStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -115,6 +116,19 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename HeapStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename HeapStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef(const 
HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename HeapStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(HeapStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class DefaultSPStorage
 ///
@@ -122,6 +136,7 @@
 ///  Implementation of the StoragePolicy used by SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class DefaultSPStorage
     {
@@ -152,15 +167,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const DefaultSPStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const DefaultSPStorage& 
sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(DefaultSPStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename DefaultSPStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(DefaultSPStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -178,6 +193,18 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename DefaultSPStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(DefaultSPStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
     
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class ArrayStorage
@@ -186,6 +213,7 @@
 ///  Implementation of the ArrayStorage used by SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 
+
     template <class T>
     class ArrayStorage
     {
@@ -216,15 +244,15 @@
         { std::swap(pointee_, rhs.pointee_); }
     
         // Accessors
-        friend inline PointerType GetImpl(const ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
-        
-        friend inline const StoredType& GetImplRef(const ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename ArrayStorage<F>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
 
-        friend inline StoredType& GetImplRef(ArrayStorage& sp)
-        { return sp.pointee_; }
+        template <class F>
+        friend const typename ArrayStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(const ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
 
+        template <class F>
+        friend typename ArrayStorage<F>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(ArrayStorage<F>& sp);
+
     protected:
         // Destroys the data stored
         // (Destruction might be taken over by the OwnershipPolicy)
@@ -240,7 +268,19 @@
         StoredType pointee_;
     };
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename ArrayStorage<T>::PointerType GetImpl(const 
ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
 
+    template <class T>
+    inline const typename ArrayStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef(const 
ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+    template <class T>
+    inline typename ArrayStorage<T>::StoredType& GetImplRef
(ArrayStorage<T>& sp)
+    { return sp.pointee_; }
+
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 ///  \class RefCounted
 ///
@@ -1064,15 +1104,6 @@
                 SP::Destroy();
             }
         }
-        
-        friend inline void Release(SmartPtr& sp, typename SP::StoredType& p)
-        {
-            p = GetImplRef(sp);
-            GetImplRef(sp) = SP::Default();
-        }
-        
-        friend inline void Reset(SmartPtr& sp, typename SP::StoredType p)
-        { SmartPtr(p).Swap(sp); }
 
         template
         <
@@ -1083,6 +1114,32 @@
             template <class> class SP1,
             template <class> class CNP1
         >
+        friend void Release(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1>& sp,
+                            typename SP1<T>::StoredType& p);
+
+        template
+        <
+            typename T1,
+            template <class> class OP1,
+            class CP1,
+            template <class> class KP1,
+            template <class> class SP1,
+            template <class> class CNP1
+        >
+        friend void Reset(SmartPtr<T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1>& sp,
+                          typename SP1<T>::StoredType p);
+
+
+
+        template
+        <
+            typename T1,
+            template <class> class OP1,
+            class CP1,
+            template <class> class KP1,
+            template <class> class SP1,
+            template <class> class CNP1
+        >
         bool Merge( SmartPtr< T1, OP1, CP1, KP1, SP1, CNP1 > & rhs )
         {
             if ( GetImpl( *this ) != GetImpl( rhs ) )
@@ -1241,6 +1298,37 @@
         { return GetImpl(*this); }
     };
 
+    template
+    <
+        typename T,
+        template <class> class OP,
+        class CP,
+        template <class> class KP,
+        template <class> class SP,
+        template <class> class CNP1,
+        typename U
+    >
+    inline void Release(SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>& sp,
+                        typename SP<T>::StoredType& p)
+    {
+      p = GetImplRef(sp);
+      GetImplRef(sp) = SP<T>::Default();
+    }
+
+    template
+    <
+        typename T,
+        template <class> class OP,
+        class CP,
+        template <class> class KP,
+        template <class> class SP,
+        template <class> class CNP1,
+        typename U
+    >
+    inline void Reset(SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>& sp,
+                      typename SP<T>::StoredType p)
+    { SmartPtr<T, OP, CP, KP, SP, CNP1>(p).Swap(sp); }
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 // free comparison operators for class template SmartPtr
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
Index: loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h
===============================================
====================
--- loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h	(revision 29)
+++ loki/include/loki/AbstractFactory.h	(revision 30)
@@ -110,15 +110,15 @@
         PrototypeFactoryUnit(AbstractProduct* p = 0)
             : pPrototype_(p)
         {}
-        
-        friend void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit& me,
-            AbstractProduct*& pPrototype)
-        { pPrototype = me.pPrototype_; }
-        
-        friend void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit& me, 
-            AbstractProduct* pObj)
-        { me.pPrototype_ = pObj; }
-        
+
+        template <class CP, class B>
+        friend void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                                   typename Base::ProductList::Head*& pPrototype);
+
+        template <class CP, class B>
+        friend void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                                   typename Base::ProductList::Head* pObj);
+
         template <class U>
         void GetPrototype(U*& p)
         { return DoGetPrototype(*this, p); }
@@ -137,6 +137,16 @@
         AbstractProduct* pPrototype_;
     };
 
+    template <class CP, class B>
+    inline void DoGetPrototype(const PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                               typename Base::ProductList::Head*& pPrototype)
+    { pPrototype = me.pPrototype_; }
+
+    template <class CP, class B>
+    inline void DoSetPrototype(PrototypeFactoryUnit<CP, B>& me,
+                               typename Base::ProductList::Head* pObj)
+    { me.pPrototype_ = pObj; }
+
 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
/////////
 // class template ConcreteFactory
 // Implements an AbstractFactory interface


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=396644&aid=1570582&group_id=29557