public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "bangerth at dealii dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/13590] unexpected overload resolution Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2004 14:01:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20040107140101.449.qmail@sources.redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20040106205426.13590.boris@kolpackov.net> ------- Additional Comments From bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-01-07 14:00 ------- There is no ambiguity in the call to f(int), because there is only one such function. That there might be an ambiguity for other argument types is irrelevant. There is also no ambiguity in my shortened example (and your original code): the base class is virtual, so there is exactly one copy and no ambiguity with what "this" pointer it has to be called. That doesn't mean, however, that a compiler is supposed to detect this special case of virtual base classes, though. W. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13590
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-07 14:01 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2004-01-06 20:54 [Bug c++/13590] New: " boris at kolpackov dot net 2004-01-06 21:10 ` [Bug c++/13590] " bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-01-06 21:56 ` boris at kolpackov dot net 2004-01-06 23:00 ` bangerth at dealii dot org 2004-01-06 23:15 ` boris at kolpackov dot net 2004-01-07 14:01 ` bangerth at dealii dot org [this message] 2004-01-11 1:05 ` [Bug c++/13590] [3.3/3.4 regression] Non-existing ambiguity when inhering through virtuals two identical using declarations giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-01-11 1:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-05 14:44 ` [Bug c++/13590] [3.3/3.4/3.5 " nathan at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-03-05 14:56 ` giovannibajo at libero dot it 2004-03-09 7:40 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-06-10 20:10 ` jason at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-06-10 22:19 ` [Bug c++/13590] [3.3/3.4/3.5 regression] [DR39] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-06-18 23:46 ` mmitchel at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-08-03 14:31 ` boris at kolpackov dot net 2004-08-14 7:21 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-10-19 11:37 ` [Bug c++/13590] [3.3/3.4/4.0 " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-31 19:34 ` [Bug c++/13590] " redi at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-08-31 19:35 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20040107140101.449.qmail@sources.redhat.com \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).