"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto@cs.auc.dk> writes:
"David Abrahams" <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:ufz6q4qlr.fsf@boost-consulting.com... | "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto@cs.auc.dk> writes:
| > are this all very complicated compared to what we want to | > achieve. wouldn't it be better just to stick to the using detail::XX | > trick and then write on the portability page that for best | > portability, always include new overloads before the range library. | | I don't know what you're suggesting precisely, nor what problem we're | trying to solve globally, so I can't answer. Maybe if someone could | synthesize this all into a short description it would be easier.
We want to find an easy way to enable ADL lookup with qualified syntax
Not possible, except through a 2-level scheme like Daniel's. In other words, a qualified call will never use ADL directly. It *can* call another function using ADL, of course.
and to find an portable implementation of that (perhaps without a using declaration).
Should be no trouble, I think. That said, I think you were on the right track to a solution. Before we declare victory we should probably discuss the issue of handling lvalue/rvalue arguments to the function that's ultimately called. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com