libstdc++/3759: nonconforming use of unqualified std:: names

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

"David Abrahams" <david.abrahams@rcn.com> writes:

| ----- Original Message -----
| From: "Gabriel Dos Reis" <gdr@codesourcery.com>
| To: "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams@rcn.com>
| Cc: <ljrittle@gcc.gnu.org>; "Gabriel Dos Reis" <gdr@codesourcery.com>;
| <gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>; <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>; <nobody@gcc.gnu.org>
| Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 1:12 PM
| Subject: Re: libstdc++/3759: nonconforming use of unqualified std:: names
| 
| 
| > "David Abrahams" <david.abrahams@rcn.com> writes:
| >
| > | There are open issues related to the problem I illustrated, but there's
| > | agreement in the LWG that an implementation has no right to exhibit the
| > | behavior I illustrated.
| >
| > The problem you reported is specifically issue #225 which is still
| > open.  I'm not saying your problem is a non-issue.  The problem,
| > if there is one, is in the Standard.
| 
| I disagree. I agree with the LWG consensus from Toronto note you quoted
| below - that there's no standard defect. The problem IMO is in libstd-c++.

I do not agree. See Issue #229.

   [Post-Tokyo: Steve Clamage submitted this issue at the request of the
   LWG to solve a problem in the standard itself similar to the problem
   within implementations of library identified by issue 225. Any
   resolution of issue 225 should be coordinated with the resolution of
   this issue.]  

   [post-Toronto: Howard is undecided about whether it is appropriate for
   all standard library function names referred to in other standard
   library functions to be explicitly qualified by std: it is common
   advice that users should define global functions that operate on their
   class in the same namespace as the class, and this requires
   argument-dependent lookup if those functions are intended to be called
   by library code. Several LWG members are concerned that valarray
   appears to require argument-dependent lookup, but that the wording may
   not be clear enough to fall under "unless explicitly described
   otherwise".]  

My personal view is that not all standard functions should be used
qualified or unqualified; therefore there ought to be a list of which
functions are subject to Koenig lookup.

-- Gaby
CodeSourcery, LLC                       http://www.codesourcery.com