Re: [boost] [review] Conversion - About specialization, overloading and ODR

Subject: Re: [boost] [review] Conversion - About specialization, overloading and ODR
From: Roman Perepelitsa (roman.perepelitsa_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-31 13:21:00

2011/8/31 Gordon Woodhull <gordon_at_[hidden]>

>
>
> On Aug 31, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Roman Perepelitsa <
> roman.perepelitsa_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> > The rule I follow is that operator+(x, x) can be provided only by the
> author
> > of x. If xdoesn't have such operator, third parties can't add one. The
> same
> > applies to swap and other functions that are expected to be found by ADL
> and
> > form the type's interface.
>
> If you were defining operator+(X,Y) you'd have the same problem. Any
> customization point involving two or more types seems to suffer this
> problem.
>

All I'm saying is that customization points requiring two UDTs are bad. I
would say that a library that promotes them should't be part of boost.

Roman Perepelitsa.