On Thursday, 3 May 2018 at 13:30:03 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 at 02:51:18 UTC, Meta wrote:
If you want that, you might be able to do `int val = val` on
the inner function, though I'm not sure that'll work.
It does not work and will do nothing.
Below compiles, but my guess i
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 at 02:51:18 UTC, Meta wrote:
If you want that, you might be able to do `int val = val` on
the inner function, though I'm not sure that'll work.
It does not work and will do nothing.
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 at 02:48:10 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 at 00:52:58 UTC, Meta wrote:
[snip]
It's not a big per se. It's a consequence of the declaration
expanding to the real template function form (I can't type it
all out as I'm on my phone), thus the inner `val` from
On Thursday, 3 May 2018 at 00:52:58 UTC, Meta wrote:
[snip]
It's not a big per se. It's a consequence of the declaration
expanding to the real template function form (I can't type it
all out as I'm on my phone), thus the inner `val` from the
function shadows the one from the template.
That
On Wednesday, 2 May 2018 at 20:32:43 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
In the function below, there is a template parameter and a
normal parameter both with the same name. However, the function
returns the normal parameter. The template parameter is
effectively ignored. I was surprised by this behavior.
Is
On Wednesday, 2 May 2018 at 20:32:43 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
In the function below, there is a template parameter and a
normal parameter both with the same name. However, the function
returns the normal parameter. The template parameter is
effectively ignored. I was surprised by this behavior.
Is
In the function below, there is a template parameter and a normal
parameter both with the same name. However, the function returns
the normal parameter. The template parameter is effectively
ignored. I was surprised by this behavior.
Is this a bug or intentional? I did not see it documented
a
