GCC 和 clang 不同意此代码。

#include <type_traits>

template <typename T, template <typename...> typename Tpl> 
struct storage {
    using type_t = T;

    template <typename... Args>
    using storage_tpl = Tpl<Args...>;
};

template <typename T, template <typename...> typename>
struct F{
    constexpr static int x = 1;
};

template <typename T >
struct F<T, std::void_t>{
    constexpr static int x = 2;
};

int f() {
    using S = storage<int, std::void_t>;

    static_assert(F<int, S::storage_tpl>().x == 2);

    return F<int, S::storage_tpl>().x;
}

根据 clang S::storage_tpl 不是 std::void_t；结果它选择了主模板 F 而不是部分特化，因此选择了断言。

乍一看，GCC 似乎是对的，因为它知道嵌套模板只是 std::void_t 的别名，但也许它太聪明了，标准要求 S::storage_tpl 和 std::void_t 必须是两个不同的模板。

谁是对的？

最佳答案

目前看来这是未指定的，h/t to T.C.看起来这被 CWG defect report 1286 涵盖了其中说:

Issue 1244 was resolved by changing the example in 17.5 [temp.type] paragraph 1 from

 template<template<class> class TT> struct X { };
  template<class> struct Y { };
  template<class T> using Z = Y<T>;
  X<Y> y;
  X<Z> z;

to

  template<class T> struct X { };
  template<class> struct Y { };
  template<class T> using Z = Y<T>;
  X<Y<int> > y;
  X<Z<int> > z;

In fact, the original intent was that the example should have been correct as written; however, the normative wording to make it so was missing. The current wording of 17.6.7 [temp.alias] deals only with the equivalence of a specialization of an alias template with the type-id after substitution. Wording needs to be added specifying under what circumstances an alias template itself is equivalent to a class template.

并提出以下决议:

Add the following as a new paragraph following 17.6.7 [temp.alias] paragraph 2:

When the type-id in the declaration of alias template (call it A) consists of a simple-template-id in which the template-argument-list consists of a list of identifiers naming each template-parameter of A exactly once in the same order in which they appear in A's template-parameter-list, the alias template is equivalent to the template named in the simple-template-id (call it T) if A and T have the same number of template-parameters. [Footnote: This rule is transitive: if an alias template A is equivalent to another alias template B that is equivalent to a class template C, then A is also equivalent to C, and A and B are also equivalent to each other. —end footnote] [Example:

  template<typename T, U = T> struct A;

  template<typename V, typename W>
    using B = A<V, W>;                // equivalent to A

  template<typename V, typename W>
    using C = A<V>;                   // not equivalent to A:
                                      // not all parameters used

  template<typename V>
    using D = A<V>;                   // not equivalent to A:
                                      // different number of parameters

  template<typename V, typename W>
    using E = A<W, V>;                // not equivalent to A:
                                      // template-arguments in wrong order

  template<typename V, typename W = int>
    using F = A<V, W>;                // equivalent to A:
                                      // default arguments not considered

  template<typename V, typename W>
    using G = A<V, W>;                // equivalent to A and B

  template<typename V, typename W>
    using H = E<V, W>;                // equivalent to E

  template<typename V, typename W>
    using I = A<V, typename W::type>; // not equivalent to A:
                                      // argument not identifier

—end example]

但此解决方案存在问题，缺陷报告仍然有效。

关于c++ - GCC/CLang 不同意模板模板参数的部分特化，我们在Stack Overflow上找到一个类似的问题： https://stackoverflow.com/questions/52725022/