I already used the SFINAE idiom quite a few times and I got used to put my std::enable_if<>
in template parameters rather than in return types. However, I came across some trivial case where it didn\'t work, and I\'m not sure why. First of all, here is my main:
int main()
{
foo(5);
foo(3.4);
}
Here is an implementation of foo
that triggers the error:
template<typename T,
typename = typename std::enable_if<std::is_integral<T>::value>::type>
auto foo(T)
-> void
{
std::cout << \"I\'m an integer!\\n\";
}
template<typename T,
typename = typename std::enable_if<std::is_floating_point<T>::value>::type>
auto foo(T)
-> void
{
std::cout << \"I\'m a floating point number!\\n\";
}
And here is a supposedly equivalent piece of code that works fine:
template<typename T>
auto foo(T)
-> typename std::enable_if<std::is_integral<T>::value>::type
{
std::cout << \"I\'m an integrer!\\n\";
}
template<typename T>
auto foo(T)
-> typename std::enable_if<std::is_floating_point<T>::value>::type
{
std::cout << \"I\'m a floating point number!\\n\";
}
My question is: why does the first implementation of foo
triggers that error while the second one does not trigger it?
main.cpp:14:6: error: redefinition of \'template<class T, class> void foo(T)\' auto foo(T) ^ main.cpp:6:6: note: \'template<class T, class> void foo(T)\' previously declared here auto foo(T) ^ main.cpp: In function \'int main()\': main.cpp:23:12: error: no matching function for call to \'foo(double)\' foo(3.4); ^ main.cpp:6:6: note: candidate: template<class T, class> void foo(T) auto foo(T) ^ main.cpp:6:6: note: template argument deduction/substitution failed: main.cpp:5:10: error: no type named \'type\' in \'struct std::enable_if<false, void>\' typename = typename std::enable_if<std::is_integral<T>::value>::type> ^
EDIT :
Working code and faulty code.