Re: [boost] [xint] Design Question

Subject: Re: [boost] [xint] Design Question
From: Scott McMurray (me22.ca+boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-06-17 01:25:08

On 16 June 2010 22:06, Chad Nelson <chad.thecomfychair_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> ...and it worked. But I don't understand why it failed in the first
> place. Those two function names are unique in the class, and they're
> obviously inherited because I can call them from outside the class. Why
> aren't they visible without the base class name from *within* the
> combined class?
>

Because when the compiler is handling the template (rather than an
instantiation of the template), the base classes can be arbitrarily
specialized, so it has no idea what's in them.  At the same time, it
wants to be able to give as many error messages as it can, so you
don't have to wait until you instantiate the member function to find
out that you typed get_bats() instead of get_bits.

So its compromise is that if you use an identifier that's not clearly
a member, it will give an error message.  As you've found out, you can
make something clearly a member by saying type::foo or this->bar.

And before all the language lawyers wince at my hand-waving, see
Jeffrey's reply for a more precise answer.