Re: [C++-0x] User-defined literals.

[Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>]

On 10/04/2010 02:16 PM, 3dw4rd@verizon.net wrote:
> > You shouldn't be able to call it as just _foo(1.2L); an operator name is
> > different from a normal function name.
>
> According to 13.5.8/7 :
>
>    [ Note: literal operators and literal operator templates are usually invoked implicitly through user-deïned
>    literals (2.14.8). However, except for the constraints described above, they are ordinary namespace-scope
>    functions and function templates. In particular, they are looked up like ordinary functions and function tem-
>    plates and they follow the same overload resolution rules. Also, they can be declared inline or constexpr,
>    they may have internal or external linkage, they can be called explicitly, their addresses can be taken, etc.
>    â end note ]

Yes, they are ordinary functions/function templates; ordinary functions 
with names like operator""x, which is different from plain x.

>    17.6.3.3.5   User-deïned literal suïxes                                                      [usrlit.suïx]
>    Literal suïx identiïers that do not start with an underscore are reserved for future standardization.

Ah, thanks.

Jason