This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [C++] deprecate overload resolution extension?


On 27-Feb-2001, Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.COM> wrote:
> 
> C++ users *like* the strong typing.

In general, yes; but is that the case for C++ users that use `-fpermissive'?
I doubt it.

> Now, it is true that the overload resolution rules have changed over time,
> so it would be reasonable to me to allow (WITH WARNINGS) cases that were
> non-ambiguous according to the ARM but ambiguous now.  But no version of
> C++ ever had the rule that one should prefer the first overload.

(1) If I understand correctly, the extension we're talking about is not
    "prefer the first overload", it is more like "if neither is
    strictly better, but one is clearly worse, then prefer the one
    that is not worse".

(2) IIUC, previous versions of GNU C++ supported this rule
    (albeit without documenting it).  So it might be right to
    say that no version of C++ ever _documented_ the rule,
    but not that no version of C++ ever _had_ the rule.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
                                    |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]