On Tuesday, 17 June 2014 at 15:15:44 UTC, Luís Marques wrote:
Is there any particular reason why this is accepted? (I
introduced it by mistake):
void foo(int = 3) {}
I guess it could be useful to ensure binary compatibility when
you expect to add the parameter later?
Actually there is no
On Tuesday, 17 June 2014 at 15:25:22 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Of course this should be accepted.
I want to apologize, that came out sounding condescending, I
didn't mean it that way.
No problem. Thanks for clarifying this for me, I was just wanted
to understand if/why this was useful
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 11:19:46 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Of course this should be accepted.
I want to apologize, that came out sounding condescending, I didn't mean
it that way.
-Steve
Is there any particular reason why this is accepted? (I
introduced it by mistake):
void foo(int = 3) {}
I guess it could be useful to ensure binary compatibility when
you expect to add the parameter later?
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 11:15:43 -0400, Luís Marques
wrote:
Is there any particular reason why this is accepted? (I
introduced it by mistake):
void foo(int = 3) {}
I guess it could be useful to ensure binary compatibility when
you expect to add the parameter later?
Of course this should
