`template ` and partial class template specialization ordering

Question

Consider:

#include <type_traits>

template <typename>
struct Tag {};

template <typename T>
auto tag = Tag<T>{};


template <typename...>
struct SelectorImpl;

// 1
template <auto... xs>
struct SelectorImpl<std::integral_constant<decltype(xs), xs>...>
{};

// 2
template <typename T, Tag<T>* tag, auto... xs>
struct SelectorImpl<std::integral_constant<decltype(tag), tag>,
                    std::integral_constant<decltype(xs), xs>...>
{};


template <auto... params>
struct Selector
: SelectorImpl<std::integral_constant<decltype(params), params>...>
{};


int main() {
    Selector<&tag<int>, 1, 2>{};
}

Both gcc and clang fail to compile this, reporting that specializations of SelectorImpl are ambiguous. I believe that specialization #2 is more specialized. Am I wrong? Is it the same issue as here? Is it a bug?

`decltype(tag)` that looks suspicious. – Yakk - Adam Nevraumont Feb 04 '18 at 17:48 — Yakk - Adam Nevraumont, Feb 04 '18 at 17:48

score 3 · Accepted Answer · answered Feb 05 '18 at 11:09

First of all, I wanted to be sure that <char X> has precedence over <auto X>. So I wrote this simple test: https://godbolt.org/g/Hy6NVB

template<auto...>
struct TestSingleImpl;

// 1
template<auto x>
struct TestSingleImpl<x> { static constexpr bool value = false; };

// 2
template<char x>
struct TestSingleImpl<x> { static constexpr bool value = true; };

static_assert(TestSingleImpl<1234>::value == false, "1");
static_assert(TestSingleImpl<'a'>::value == true, "2");

Result: yep, it has precedence (no ambiguity)

Then I applied the same example with variadic args: https://godbolt.org/g/7mWaeH

template <typename...>
struct Test;

// 1
template<auto v, auto... x>
struct Test<std::integral_constant<decltype(v), v>,
            std::integral_constant<decltype(x), x>...>
{
    static constexpr bool value = true;
};

// 2
template<char v, auto... x>
struct Test<std::integral_constant<char, v>,
            std::integral_constant<decltype(x), x>...>
{
    static constexpr bool value = false;
};

template <auto... params>
struct Selector : Test<std::integral_constant<decltype(params), params>...> {};

static_assert(Selector<1234, 1, 2>::value == true, "1"); // 1 - ok
static_assert(Selector<'a', 1, 2>::value == false, "2"); // 2 - AMBIGUITY

Looks like template<char v, auto... x> doesn't have precedence over template<auto... x>.

this looks like a HUGE bug in both CLANG and GCC

If we remove the std::integral_constant, it works properly: https://godbolt.org/g/grRC8h

This confirms the bug :)

template <auto...>
struct Test;

// 1
template<auto v, auto... x>
struct Test<v, x...>
{
    static constexpr bool value = true;
};

// 2
template<char v, auto... x>
struct Test<v, x...>
{
    static constexpr bool value = false;
};

static_assert(Test<1234, 1, 2>::value == true, "1"); // 1 - ok
static_assert(Test<'a', 1, 2>::value == false, "2"); // 2 - ok

Did this get reported as a bug to the gcc/clang developers? – Andy G Sep 21 '20 at 06:32 — Andy G, Sep 21 '20 at 06:32
No idea, I don't recall reporting it – Ivan Sanz Carasa Sep 21 '20 at 08:06 — Ivan Sanz Carasa, Sep 21 '20 at 08:06

`template ` and partial class template specialization ordering

1 Answers1

this looks like a HUGE bug in both CLANG and GCC