This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: g++ - fundamentals question
On Tuesday 03 December 2002 16:36, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Ivan wrote:
> > Why fundamental types are not realized as classes in g++?
> Because that wouldn't be C++.
I'm seriously doubt that: it depends on how it's realized.
> > It could be very useful if there was ability to inherit them.
> And then what? Override methods on floats for instance? Sure that might
> be useful to some, but most of those things can be done with a single
> member class and properly overloaded operators.
Going that way will result in heavy code with more potential errors and lots
of unnecessary hours spent...
Preserving abilities and rights of 'some' is a democracy, isn't it?