On 12/23/12 03:35, Walter Bright wrote:
On 12/22/2012 8:03 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I think this is a fallacious argument because it concludes that apples
should be
peeled because oranges should.
Given, in C++:
struct S
{
public:
void foo(int);
private:
void foo(float);
}
void bar()
{
S s;
s.foo(1.0f);
}
This is an error in C++:
Yeah, and it must stay one for D overload sets too.
In my pull request I always used the most accessible protection for the
visibility of an overload set without removing the access check after
overload resolution.
http://dlang.org/hijack.html
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/739
