Re: Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator

Re: Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator

[Wolfgang Bangerth]

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
 
 

Re: Re: c++/8821: gcc 3.2 problem with overloaded inherited operator

[andre]

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 ;-)