Hi Etienne, Am Freitag, den 20.06.2008, 18:04 +0200 schrieb Etienne Kneuss: [...] > 2) parent:: carries the info while ParentClassName:: doesn't > + convenient > + no functionnality lost > - introduces a difference between parent:: and classname::, but > restricted to LSB so no BC break
Thanks for bringing this on topic again. I would like to see 2) implemented, as the current behaviour looks unpredictable to strangers. Stas, you argued, that non-forward static calls would no longer be possible? Doesn't the con argument in Etiennes list solve that issue or do I miss something? If you want non-forwarding calls, use <classname>::method()? cu, Lars
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
