foo(bar, a, b) written as bar.foo(a, b) [was SuperString v2 in the vault]
On 7/11/06, Andy Little <andy@servocomm.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
"me22" <me22.ca@gmail.com> wrote
If foo(bar,a,b) could always be written as bar.foo(a,b)
That would break some of my code FWIW
In what way? Would it still break with a new overload resolution rule that a member function called as a member function is a better match than a non-member function called as a member function? ~ Scott McMurray
"me22" <me22.ca@gmail.com> wrote
On 7/11/06, Andy Little <andy@servocomm.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
"me22" <me22.ca@gmail.com> wrote
If foo(bar,a,b) could always be written as bar.foo(a,b)
That would break some of my code FWIW
In what way? Would it still break with a new overload resolution rule that a member function called as a member function is a better match than a non-member function called as a member function?
So when I call bar.foo(a,b) I may be getting foo.bar(a,b) or if I forgot to define it or it doesnt match?, maybe something ::foo(...)? It sounds to me like the ADL issue all over again FWIW. regards Andy Little
participants (2)
-
Andy Little -
me22