On Thu May 22 2008 06:34:27 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote: > On 21/05/2008, Mike Bird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed May 21 2008 20:01:10 Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote: > > > So what's the fix here? Why does a using A::f declaration inside class > > > B not work? > > > > There's no f(int) in scope, only int(foo). > > No, no, wait. This makes no sense. Consider
(two example programs snipped) > The *only* thing that changed is the access specifiers. For some > reason, the name lookup works and it seems that the compiler > understands that "using A::f" means "A::f(int)" when some function is > public but fails when the function is private, and tries instead to > interpret "using A::f" as "A::f(C)". The first example fails to > compile, but the second one does. The first thing to note is that neither of these is your original example, so it would be better if you had written "the *only* difference between the two examples above is the access specifiers". You then complain that it doesn't work when you try to "using" a private function. Had you quoted the compiler's message to you, which was probably "error: ‘virtual void A::f(foo)’ is private", it would be immediately obvious that EITHER you know nothing of C++ INCLUSIVE OR you're deliberately wasting bandwidth on this list. > > But the best solution is to read up on WHY C++ works this way so > > you can understand the implications that thousands of great minds > > have already pondered. > > Well, those great minds seem to be too great for me to fathom, because > I really don't see why it seems here that a function's signature isn't > enough to specify it, and they saw it fit to make sure I couldn't both > I overload and inherit three related but different functions. Exactly. Overload ambiguities are resolved in scope, not beyond. > C++ isn't perfect, the standard isn't gospel, and I'm beginning to > suspect a bug in gcc. Please stop now. Thousands of people, some of them much smarter than you or I, have not only decided that C++ should do this (which could be a bug) but explained at great length and in great detail why C++ works this way (thus showing that it is not a bug). You have been given a precise reference to a good example of such an explanation but you ignore it. This was offtopic anyway. Please do your homework and then if you still have questions address them to a C++ forum. --Mike Bird -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
