generalized lvalues

[Ziemowit Laski]

On 18 Nov 2004, at 10.09, Joe Buck wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 08:18:50AM -0800, Fariborz Jahanian wrote:
>> What was the rational to have this extension in the first place. Maybe
>> we sould dig this out before
>> declaring that it was a 'bad idea'.
>
> It's a C extension that is wrong for C++.
>
> It interacts very badly with overloading.  There is no overloading in 
> C.

Of course, since we are discussing a language extension, _we_ get to 
decide how it interacts with C++ overloading.
For the same reason, Matt's assertion that the feature "breaks valid 
C++ programs" is inherently contradictory,
since programs containing it cannot be valid. :-)

--Zem