public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "keean@fry-it.com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug c++/53573] template type dependent name resolution broken
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 17:01:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-53573-4-peYfhmtcF7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-53573-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53573

--- Comment #21 from Keean Schupke <keean@fry-it.com> 2012-06-05 17:01:01 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #20)

Yes, once again sorry. Obviously not GCC's problem for implementing the
standard correctly, but this causes problems producing elegant datatype generic
code. For example if a concept is defined in a library (using Boost Concept
Checking for example) and I want to make 'int' comply to that concept, I would
have to declare the new int methods before including the library. This seems
very odd in end user code. 

In this case there is nothing intuitively wrong with the way GCC was doing it -
it was not difficult for the compiler authors to implement, and nor did it lead
to incorrect or hard to understand code, in fact it worked very well for
generic programming.

Is there any chance this 'feature' of GCC could be kept as a g++ specific
extension in 'gnu++11' mode, as I think the old behaviour is an improvement
over that suggested in the standard, and GCC provides other extensions to
standard behaviour where it is useful.


> I'm under the impression that the bug reports using the word 'broken' are the
> ones most likely broken, err invalid. Maybe just another manifestation of the
> illusion of confidence, well known to the psychologjsts? (for a very nice intro
> see, eg, Chabris & Simons, 'The invisible gorilla', Ch 3)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-06-05 17:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-04 13:08 [Bug c++/53573] New: template type dependant " keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-04 13:31 ` [Bug c++/53573] " keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-04 13:33 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-04 13:44 ` [Bug c++/53573] template type dependent " keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-04 16:38 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-04 17:13 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05  9:06 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05 10:02 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-05 10:15 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05 10:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-05 11:03 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-05 11:07 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05 11:14 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05 11:26 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05 11:31 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-05 11:34 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-05 11:53 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05 11:54 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-05 11:57 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-05 12:55 ` keean@fry-it.com
2012-06-05 16:31 ` paolo.carlini at oracle dot com
2012-06-05 17:01 ` keean@fry-it.com [this message]
2012-06-05 17:30 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2012-06-27  6:48 ` keean@fry-it.com

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=bug-53573-4-peYfhmtcF7@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --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: link
Be 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).