When I see
boost::overload_resolve2<int, char>(&V::f)
it reminds me of the windows API functions that end in 'Ex'. I
<Arturo_Cuebas@bpmicro.com> wrote in message news:OF1D166987.D055FE93-ON86256EFA.00733184-86256EFA.007453D4@bpmicro.com... think
'what was wrong with the first version of overload_resolve'?
LOL
From best to worst IMO: overload_resolve2<int, char>(&V::f)
I could learn to live with it. But I'd prefer resolve_overload2 -- it sounds more like a command.
overload2_resolve<int, char>(&V::f)
Looks to much like Food2Go :-)
overload<int, char>::resolve(&V::f)
As I said, I think I like this best.
overload_resolve<int, char>()(&V::f)
Look's funny. And are you sure there is no runtime penalty?
overload_resolve<argtypes<int, char> >(&V::f)
Too compilicated ... wait ... I suggested it. Still too complicated. Jonathan