From: David Abrahams (david.abrahams_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-01-12 18:37:30
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rainer Deyke" <root_at_[hidden]>
> > Overloaded functions can be just as confusing as member functions of
> > pointers, but there is an important difference. C++ programmers already
> > overloaded functions. Overloading is an important part of the C++
> > and is used routinely in library and application development. This means
> > that C++ programmers do pay attention to differences in function call
> > syntax - such as Release(*sp) versus Release(sp) - in writing and
> > code.
> I tend to think of a overloaded function as a single generic function.
> Therefore I find a single function overloaded with significantly different
> semantics more confusing that member functions for smart pointers.
Ah, but only within a single namespace, yes? Surely a function foo(<args1>)
in namespace A is not required to be semantically related to foo(<args2>) in
namespace B. That would effectively reserve the name for the first library
that used it...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk