On Sep 1, 2009, at 10:39 AM, Ted Kremenek wrote:
>
> On Sep 1, 2009, at 10:31 AM, Douglas Gregor wrote:
>
>>> Can we make pointer comparisons of DeclContext objects illegal
>>> (e.g., a private operator== method)?
>>
>> Sadly, no :(
>>
>> An overloaded operator has to have at least on parameter of class
>> or enumeration type (or reference to one of those). The signature
>> we would need, e.g.,
>>
>> private:
>> friend bool operator==(DeclContext *, DeclContext *);
>>
>> does not qualify.
>>
>> - Doug
>
> Ah, that's right. Would it be possible to do this if we were using
> DeclContext& instead of DeclContext* in all places where we referred
> to DeclContext objects?
Yes, although I fear that might be a bit awkward to use. We're often
walking parent contexts, lookup contexts, etc., so that DeclContext&
wouldn't be appropriate. Now, we could do a whole-sale replacement of
DeclContext * for a new smart pointer DeclContextPtr... then we can do
whatever we want, including make operator== do the right thing.
- Doug
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
