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

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/3759; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@codesourcery.com>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: libstdc++/3759: nonconforming use of unqualified std:: names
Date: 24 Jul 2001 20:00:13 +0200

 "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