On Jan 19, 2006, at 10:52 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
[...snip...]
| I think that what you're telling me is that the name resolution
| algorithm uses _only_ the method's name (not its signature) to first
| select a namespace,
Not a namespace, but a base class.
Sorry, I was using namespace in the generic sense.
Are you telling me that C++ namespace function/static resolution
operates _differently_ than it does class method/member resolultion?
[...snip..]
If you fully qualify the name, either as C1::f or C2::f, then you'll
resolve the ambiguity.
Yeah, I know...but my question is why should I have to when there is
no real ambiguity?
If I am to accept that namespace and class name resolutions operate
differently. What's the analog to "using namespace" if it's not
public inheritance?
Can I do something like:
class M : public C1, public C2
{
using C1;
using C2;
}.
My problem is that C1 and C2 happen to be the same template,
instantiated with _different_ type parameters. Does this mean that I
have to explicitly and tediously list each and every single method in
the template?
