On Saturday, 21 December 2013 at 19:29:28 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
Yes, this is understood, but it seems like a good tradeoff when compared to the alternative where overload resolution depends on look-up origin. The latter could easily break generic code and simple refactorings could introduce subtle bugs.
Still don't understand how intended and expected behavior can be called "bug".
(I don't like updated DIP at all and will be against anything that puts private symbols into overload sets)
