[boost] Re: name clash

From: Bo Persson (bop2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-18 05:48:17

"Gabriel Dos Reis" <gdr_at_[hidden]> skrev i meddelandet
news:m3n0rlvxy0.fsf_at_soliton.integrable-solutions.net...
>
> Some days ago, someone was wondering on this list (sorry, I can't find
> the message off hand) whether the following construct
>
>    typedef reverse_iterator<T> reverse_iterator;
>
> were valid or not and reported that one of his compiler rejected it.

Yes, but

typedef std::reverse_iterator<T> reverse_iterator;

is accepted.

> His compiler was right; somewhere, the standard says
>
> 3.3/4
>    Given a set of declarations in a single declarative region, each of
>    which specifies the same unqualified name,

Note: "unqualified name"

>      --- they shall all refer to the same entity, or all refer to
>          functions and function templates; or
>
>      --- exactly one declaration shall declare a class name or
>          enumeration name that is not a typedef name and the other
>          declarations shall all refer to the same object or
>          enumerator, or all refer to functions and func-tion
>          templates; in this case the class name or enumeration name is
>          hidden (3.3.7). [Note: a namespace name or a class template
>          name must be unique in its declarative region (7.3.2, clause
>          14). ]
>
> Hope that helps,
>
> -- Gaby

Bo Persson
bop2_at_[hidden]