On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 16:29:01 UTC, Carl Sturtivant
wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 15:57:33 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 15:10:57 UTC, Carl Sturtivant
wrote:
void main() {
//conversions from string part of the definitions of
Data, Data2
f( "hello", "bonjour"); //no way to do this ---
disappointing
}
See
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/[email protected]
Function calls are a more complicated case because of overload
resolution.
If f(string, string) is defined, this will a) break silently
or b) require qualification. Both is disappointing, too.
I do not understand why your (a) and (b) provably must be so.
Please supply an argument: there seem to be other possibilities
and without a proof that there are not, we may as well seek to
do the right thing.
I have code that executes f(Data, Data), but I'm actually
passing (string, string). Now someone of my coworkers defines
f(string, string), which is visible to my code. I see two
possibilities: My codes executes the new function f, which
silently brakes my program or the compiler says that two possible
overloads are in place and requires explicit qualification of the
correct function (I'm probably back to f(Data(), Data()).
What is the third way you have in mind?
In the absence of such comprehension on my part, it seems to me
that what's needed are some consistent rules that generalize
the overloading rules about the interaction of opPass and
overloading, with some priorities so that the best match is
found. Perhaps some combinations of opPass and overloading
should be illegal. Not that I've thought this through. :)
I'm just saying that it is more complicated that simple
assignment.
