On 12/22/2012 1:29 AM, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
Walter Bright wrote:
It's that way in C++ mainly so that it doesn't make the already complex
overloading system even more so. And in 25 years of working with C++,
I've never seen this make anyone's list of horrible things about C++.
Actually, it is *not* that way in C++ for "module-private"
functions. I know that C++ doesn't have true "modules" and a
fortiori true "module-private" functions (or types or variables),
but the C++ equivalent of module-private is file static (or the
anonymous namespace) and those do *not* make it into the overload
set and cannot affect user code.
I was talking about inside struct/class scope.
