Seweryn Habdank-Wojewódzki wrote:
Hi!
Thanks for reply.
# piątek 22 czerwca 2007 06:18, @ David Abrahams:
I'm sorry, I can't understand what you're saying. Examples might help.
I try :-).
Let's consider such a hiphotetical situation. We have a classes:
template < typename T > struct Bar { T t_; }
class Foo { public: typedef int A; typedef Bar<A> BA; // ... };
Above order of definitions is important, due to language demand and compiler functionality
I don't think this statement is accurate. What is important is not the order of definitions, but the visibility of declarations at any particular place in the code where a particular symbol is actually used (the 'call site'). There are clear rules about how ambiguities are to be resolved in binding names to declared types or variables. They have nothing to do with in what order the declarations appeared (and are seen by the compiler). Regards, Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...