On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 02:29, Richard Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I don't know what that "somewhere" would be, nor do I know why I'd
>> write a using-declaration for somewhere::get.
>
>
> Consider:
>
> // user.h
> struct get {};
>
> // user.cc
> #include "user.h"
> #include <QPair>
>
> That won't compile with your above approach. Unqualified lookup for 'get'
> finds the user's struct ::get, so ADL is not performed. Adding the
> using-declaration fixes the problem:
Sure, I understood what you meant before.
>
> // QPair
> namespace detail {
> template<int> void get(...) = delete;
> }
> void whatever() {
> using detail::get; // add this to fix the problem
> QPair<What, Ever> qp;
> get<1>(qp); // ::get not found by unqualified lookup, so ADL is performed
> now
> }
>
> If you have some default implementation of 'get' (such as a general
> unspecialized one), then you could 'using' that instead of using a
> placeholder one like detail::get.
Right; I have no intention of forcing my users or recommending that
anyone else forces their users
to write a using-declaration whenever they want to use a tuple-like
interface on their types, even if it
can sometimes theoretically clash with namespace-scope non-functions.
We have a language fix that makes hidden friend templates work with
ADL when template arguments are provided
for a call. We have work-arounds that don't come even close to
achieving the same functionality. It would seem
rather reasonable to allow programmers to detect when they can use the
new superior functionality.
--
SG10 mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg10
