------- Additional Comments From adah at netstd dot com 2005-08-12 09:23 ------- (In reply to comment #95) > | > | Herb Sutter's opinion (N1792) is a little different. He thinks that > | > | ADL should not work in the OP's example, because distance is simply > | > | not an `interface' of std::vector (technically, instead of from > | > | human eyes). But it is also self-consistent. > | > All those are assertions, little evidence. Notice that what is > | > considered an "interface" varies from one individual to another > | > individual. And we just don't have a definition for it, so you're > | > still using your "human eyes" definition, i.e. projection of your own > | > wishes. > | > | By `technical' I meant algorithmically recognizable. > you still fail to provide such a definition for "interface". > -- Gaby
Why should I? Herb defined it in Exceptional C++, Item 32: For a class X, all functions, including free functions, that both * `mention' X * are `supplied with' X are logically part of X, because they form part of the interface of X. Yongwei -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15910
