Re: [boost] checked_delete.hpp fix

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-25 09:28:31

Beman Dawes wrote:
> At 08:34 AM 2/25/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>
>  >Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
>  >
>  >> Go ahead and make the change, unless someone voices an objection.
>  >>
>  >> I'm wondering how may other places we have similar problems?
>  >
>  >Now you know why I've been making such a stink about insidious ADL!

"I told you so!" ;-)

>  >> Is there any programatic way to detect them?
>  >
>  >I've been trying to get compiler vendors to add a warning for names
>  to >which ADL applies but which are found in the local namespace.
>  This, >at least, would give us a way to detect likely candidates.
>  No takers >yet :(.
>
> Hum, it looks like Microsoft took you up on it. See the
> shared_ptr_test warning on the VC++ 7.1 beta regression test.

No, C4675 is the opposite of what Dave wants. Earlier MSVC didn't support
ADL at all, and MSVC 7.1 is now issuing the warning for every place ADL
kicks in since this may alter the behavior of existing code. Dave wants a
warning when ADL could have kicked in but didn't. Sounds like a neat plan to
solicit _many_ user complaints. ;-)