From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27356 invoked by alias); 4 Nov 2008 10:49:21 -0000 Received: (qmail 13941 invoked by uid 48); 4 Nov 2008 10:47:59 -0000 Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:49:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20081104104759.13940.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug c++/38005] inconsistent precedence of operators in namespaces In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "c dot hite at rtsgroup dot net" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg00271.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #5 from c dot hite at rtsgroup dot net 2008-11-04 10:47 ------- I'm fine with case #1. I don't know if Sun is wrong, or there is no "right". #2 is a BUG. No, the lookup doesn't stop at "operator<<(Thing&o,Thing&)", it keeps going, but it keeps going differently. Please look at it. In namespace C after the compiler realizes that the local operator doesn't match, I expect it to try the other operators in the same order as if that local operator didn't exist. Why do C and D generate different calls? When deciding between the other two operators outside their namespace C and D should reach the same decision. -- c dot hite at rtsgroup dot net changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED Resolution|INVALID | http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38005