On 2009-09-19 21:17:36 -0400, language_fan <f...@bar.com.invalid> said:
Since the constructor has no meaning outside classes, should it be interpreted as a free function if mixed in a non-class context? I really wonder how this could be valid code. Does the grammar even support the 3rd line?
Personally, I'd like it very much if functions from template mixins could overload with functions from outside the mixin. It'd allow me to replace string mixins with template mixins in quite a few places.
-- Michel Fortin michel.for...@michelf.com http://michelf.com/
