From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2474 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2004 03:52:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 2462 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2004 03:52:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO dberlin.org) (68.164.203.246) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 18 Nov 2004 03:52:47 -0000 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (HELO dberlin.org) by dberlin.org (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.2.6) with ESMTP-TLS id 7571083; Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:52:47 -0500 Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:18:00 -0000 From: Daniel Berlin To: Andrew Pinski cc: Matt Austern , gcc mailing list Subject: Re: generalized lvalues In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <8AD5AEEF-3914-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00609.txt.bz2 On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Andrew Pinski wrote: > > On Nov 17, 2004, at 10:47 PM, Matt Austern wrote: > >> 1. It broke valid C++ programs. If we overload a function on constness, >> like foo(int&) and foo(const int&), then invoking it as foo((int) x) is >> required to call the const version. Generalized lvalues made us choose >> the latter. > > If it broke it please file a bug and don't complain that we broke it. I believe you interpreted what he said backwards :) I believe he means that the generalized lvalues made us get some valid C++ programs choose the wrong fnuction to call, and that removing the extension fixed that :)