Hello,
i saw this message here on the mailing list archive:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/2006-03/msg00027.html
and followed the thread with great interest.
John Love-Jensen wrote:
> The two functions have different prototypes, I thought that the
compiler was
able to differentiate them.
Different prototypes, but the same name. The name is what is
causing the
error, not the rest of the signature.
Ok, i guess this is because of the same name, but why is it ok with
the C++ standard?
operator++(int) and operator++() do have the same name, but they are
considered
as different by a c++ compiler...
To avoid this kind of situation, I recommend using a different
method name
for the method with the different signature.
>Then it compiles but there is a *link* error ! Can somebody
explain me what
happens ?
You have not defined the a::foo function anywhere. So there is a link
error.
Technically, a::foo() is not "defined" anywhere (i understand what
you mean),
but it does not need to, since it is a pure virtual functions.
But a::foo() is "implemented" in class "d" (return 1), so when
calling a::foo() the
compiler should redirect the call to the implementation d::foo(), no?
jérôme cornet
