I get "template instance main.MyClass!(int) error instantiating" in the following case:

public class MyClass(TStuff)
{
	public void foo(TStuff item)
	{}

	public void foo(TRange)(TRange items)
	if (isInputRange!TRange && is(ElementType!TRange == TStuff))
	{}
}

void main(string[] argv)
{
	MyClass!int instance = new MyClass!int();

	return;
}

but if i rename one of the "foo" overloads then code will be compiled.

On Saturday, 17 November 2012 at 18:28:10 UTC, ref2401 wrote:
> I get "template instance main.MyClass!(int) error instantiating" in the following case:
>
> public class MyClass(TStuff)
> {
> 	public void foo(TStuff item)
> 	{}
>
> 	public void foo(TRange)(TRange items)
> 	if (isInputRange!TRange && is(ElementType!TRange == TStuff))
> 	{}
> }
>
> void main(string[] argv)
> {
> 	MyClass!int instance = new MyClass!int();
>
> 	return;
> }
>
> but if i rename one of the "foo" overloads then code will be compiled.

Full error message is:

Error: template main.MyClass!(int).MyClass.foo(TRange) if (isInputRange!(TRange) && is(ElementType!(TRange) == TStuff)) conflicts with function main.MyClass!(int).MyClass.foo at main.d(3)
main.d(13): Error: template instance main.MyClass!(int) error instantiating

That's why renaming foo makes dmd happy. Alternatively you can add extra dummy parenthesis in the first foo to make it template function. This is not the first case I see adding parenthesis to function declarations solves compilation errors.

Maxim Fomin wrote:

> solves compilation errors

From the docs:
| If a template has exactly one member in it, and the name of
| that member is the same as the template name, that member
| is assumed to be referred to in a template instantiation

It seems that the problem is located in this definition.

-manfred

On Saturday, 17 November 2012 at 20:44:05 UTC, Manfred Nowak wrote:
> Maxim Fomin wrote:
>
>> solves compilation errors
>
> From the docs:
> | If a template has exactly one member in it, and the name of
> | that member is the same as the template name, that member
> | is assumed to be referred to in a template instantiation
>
> It seems that the problem is located in this definition.
>
> -manfred

How eponymous templates are related to the issue?

On Saturday, 17 November 2012 at 18:28:10 UTC, ref2401 wrote:
> I get "template instance main.MyClass!(int) error instantiating" in the following case:
>
> public class MyClass(TStuff)
> {
> 	public void foo(TStuff item)
> 	{}
>
> 	public void foo(TRange)(TRange items)
> 	if (isInputRange!TRange && is(ElementType!TRange == TStuff))
> 	{}
> }
>
> void main(string[] argv)
> {
> 	MyClass!int instance = new MyClass!int();
>
> 	return;
> }
>
> but if i rename one of the "foo" overloads then code will be compiled.

Template functions are currently not overloadable with non-template ones. As a workaround (if foo(TStuff) doesn't need to be virtual), you can turn it into a template function (without parameters, i.e. foo()(TStuff item)) as well.

David

On 11/17/2012 07:28 PM, ref2401 wrote:
> I get "template instance main.MyClass!(int) error instantiating" in the
> following case:
>
> public class MyClass(TStuff)
> {
>      public void foo(TStuff item)
>      {}
>
>      public void foo(TRange)(TRange items)
>      if (isInputRange!TRange && is(ElementType!TRange == TStuff))
>      {}
> }
>
> void main(string[] argv)
> {
>      MyClass!int instance = new MyClass!int();
>
>      return;
> }
>
> but if i rename one of the "foo" overloads then code will be compiled.
>

Making the first overload a template fixes your issue, but note that your code is indeed valid D code. It is the compiler which does not implement overloading of functions vs. function templates yet.

Maxim Fomin wrote:

> related to the issue?

... I can see that the definition is ambiguous. And if the coder didnt't realize the ambiguousness as you do ...

-manfred

On 11/18/2012 12:14 AM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
> Maxim Fomin wrote:
>
>> related to the issue?
>
> ... I can see that the definition is ambiguous. And if the coder
> didnt't realize the ambiguousness as you do ...
>
> -manfred
>

The code given in the original post is valid D code.

On Saturday, 17 November 2012 at 23:14:56 UTC, Manfred Nowak wrote:
> Maxim Fomin wrote:
>
>> related to the issue?
>
> ... I can see that the definition is ambiguous. And if the coder
> didnt't realize the ambiguousness as you do ...
>
> -manfred

There is compilation error when instantiating class template which has on overload set consisting of template and non-template function. How this is related to eponymous templates?

On Saturday, 17 November 2012 at 23:28:21 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 11/18/2012 12:14 AM, Manfred Nowak wrote:
>> Maxim Fomin wrote:
>>
>>> related to the issue?
>>
>> ... I can see that the definition is ambiguous. And if the coder
>> didnt't realize the ambiguousness as you do ...
>>
>> -manfred
>>
>
> The code given in the original post is valid D code.

This is a poor argument. Validness of code is determined by the spec (and I have not found anything related to the issue) and is supported by presence of alternative compilers so you can switch to another if you have problems with one of them.

This is not the case of D. Unfortunately D spec is incomplete and does not give answers even for not tricky questions. Also, only few commits to dmd which affect language have corresponding pulls to dlang.org. And presence of alternative compilers does not help in majority cases because they share same frontend as well as bugs in it. This makes D's bugs to be a chief if you cannot fallback to ldc or gdc and makes theoretical validness of code irrelevant at practice.