public inbox for gcc-prs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Re: Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator
@ 2002-12-10 23:16 andre
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: andre @ 2002-12-10 23:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR c++/8821; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: andre@kiwisound.de
To: bangerth@dealii.org,
andre@kiwisound.de,
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org,
gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org,
nobody@gcc.gnu.org,
gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:09:02 +0100
bangerth@dealii.org schrieb am 10.12.2002, 23:28:06:
> Synopsis: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->analyzed
> State-Changed-By: bangerth
> State-Changed-When: Tue Dec 10 14:28:05 2002
> State-Changed-Why:
> I can confirm that this problem exists. However, I am
> not sure whether it is really a bug: the operator
> you want to call is simply hidden by the operator
> in the derived class. What I don't know is how lookup
> of member operators happen -- if the same rule applies
> as for virtual functions, then the operator in the base
> class is rightfully hidden; if not, then this is a bug.
>
> On the other hand, if virtual function semantics apply,
> then a function similar to -Woverloaded-virtual should
> exist.
>
In my opinion it IS a bug because the operator of the parent class has
another argument. So the name resolution should detect the matching
operator in the parent class as usual in C++. I think overloaded
operators should behave like overloaded functions (where the same thing
works!). If its not in the C++ standard I have to believe now in Java or
.net ;-)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator
@ 2002-12-11 6:46 Wolfgang Bangerth
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Wolfgang Bangerth @ 2002-12-11 6:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: nobody; +Cc: gcc-prs
The following reply was made to PR c++/8821; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu>
To: andre@kiwisound.de
Cc: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, <gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:43:28 -0600 (CST)
> In my opinion it IS a bug because the operator of the parent class has
> another argument. So the name resolution should detect the matching
> operator in the parent class as usual in C++. I think overloaded
> operators should behave like overloaded functions (where the same thing
> works!).
Note the distinction I made between overloaded functions and overloaded
virtual functions. For some historical reason, a virtual function with a
different argument list hides a function with the same name in the base
class. This is not the case for non-virtual functions. I just don't know
how operators behave. That's the question here. I concede that the
behavior is confusing.
Regards
Wolfgang
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth email: bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu
www: http://www.ticam.utexas.edu/~bangerth
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-12-11 14:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-12-10 23:16 Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator andre
2002-12-11 6:46 Wolfgang Bangerth
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).