From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-14 07:53:27
"Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
> "David Abrahams" <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote in message news:ufz6q4qlr.fsf_at_boost-consulting.com...
> | "Thorsten Ottosen" <nesotto_at_[hidden]> writes:
> | > are this all very complicated compared to what we want to
> | > achieve. wouldn't it be better just to stick to the using detail::XX
> | > trick and then write on the portability page that for best
> | > portability, always include new overloads before the range library.
> | I don't know what you're suggesting precisely, nor what problem we're
> | trying to solve globally, so I can't answer. Maybe if someone could
> | synthesize this all into a short description it would be easier.
> We want to find an easy way to enable ADL lookup with qualified
Not possible, except through a 2-level scheme like Daniel's. In other
words, a qualified call will never use ADL directly. It *can* call
another function using ADL, of course.
> and to find an portable implementation of that (perhaps without a
> using declaration).
Should be no trouble, I think. That said, I think you were on the
right track to a solution.
Before we declare victory we should probably discuss the issue of
handling lvalue/rvalue arguments to the function that's ultimately
-- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk