From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-help-return-9790-listarch-gcc-help=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 30539 invoked by alias); 12 Aug 2002 14:01:41 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 30528 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2002 14:01:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO www.fastmail.fm) (209.61.183.86)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 12 Aug 2002 14:01:39 -0000
Received: from www.fastmail.fm (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by localhost.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 72D586DB60; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 09:01:35 -0500 (CDT)
X-Epoch: 1029160895
X-Sasl-enc: CTvUiN0skMZJqRs6xeR+xw
Received: from fastmail.fm (x1-6-00-e0-81-03-b8-78.k35.webspeed.dk [62.242.176.174])
	by www.fastmail.fm (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 044406DB91; Mon, 12 Aug 2002 09:01:34 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <3D57BFBF.E3872801@fastmail.fm>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 07:01:00 -0000
From: bjorn rohde jensen <bjensen@fastmail.fm>
Reply-To: bjensen@fastmail.fm
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andrey Pozdeev <AndreyPozdeev@rambler.ru>
Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Problem with overloaded function selection
References: <3D578A07.AA20189@mb1.rambler.ru>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2002-08/txt/msg00088.txt.bz2

Hi Andrey,

The conversions

>     operator double() {return 0L;};
>     operator int() { return 0; };

 are equally poor, as one level of user defined
conversions and one level of default conversions
are required to match

> void test(char){};

 Having both conversions causes neither to be
considered, which means that

>     operator A() { return A();};

is the only choice.

 Removing either of
>     operator double() {return 0L;};
>     operator int() { return 0; };

 makes the call
>   test(b);

 ambiguous, since
> void test(char){};

is a candidate through one level of user defined
conversions and one level of default conversions
and

> void test(A){};
is a candidate through one level of user defined
conversions.

 I guess, one will have to look in the specs to
see, who is right in this matter. My gut feeling
is, that it gcc is right. Conversions and function
overloading seem pretty othogonal to me. Why should
two conversions be worse than one conversion in matching
an overloaded function??

Yours sincerely,

Bjorn