From -1288952387515528374 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,ccb40040597f37a7 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-12 12:52:16 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: brangdon@cix.co.uk (Dave Harris) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Extending enums (was Re: Forward declaration of enum) Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:52:15 +0000 (UTC) Lines: 32 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1047502335 10605 10.0.0.1 (12 Mar 2003 20:52:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:52:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.oz.au ([128.250.1.22]) by news.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 18tDCw-0002ku-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Wed, 12 Mar 2003 20:52:14 +0000 X-Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU id HAA15444; Thu, 13 Mar 2003 07:52:11 +1100 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-Reply-To: brangdon@cix.co.uk X-Orig-NNTP-Posting-Host: pc1-clif1-6-cust113.nott.cable.ntl.com (80.4.200.113) X-Orig-X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1047471441 68897874 80.4.200.113 (16 [57443]) X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.6 required=5.0 tests=QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01 version=2.41 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:18292 comp.std.c++_2003-03-11@nmhq.net (Niklas Matthies) wrote (abridged): > > If we have both kinds of overloading, we don't really know > > where to start. > > Is this really conceptually different from types with (possibly > multiple) implicit conversions used in overloaded function argument > context? It's conceptually different, but I agree not very practically different. Another example is 0. int i = 0; double d = 0; int *p = 0; One might imagine there are three different kinds of 0, with 3 different types, but conceptually in C++ there is only one 0 and its type is int. In both cases we start with an inner expression which is unambiguous, and that expression does not change meaning as we add context. Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK | "Weave a circle round him thrice, brangdon@cix.co.uk | And close your eyes with holy dread, | For he on honey dew hath fed http://www.bhresearch.co.uk/ | And drunk the milk of Paradise." --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]