DMD 0.165 release
Walter Bright
newshound at digitalmars.com
Mon Aug 21 15:48:25 PDT 2006
Derek Parnell wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:47:01 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> Frank Benoit wrote:
>>>> It doesn't break existing once-working code, because the example shown
>>>> will not compile with 0.164 and earlier compilers.
>>> It does if you had before both:
>>> void fn( char delegate() ch ){...}
>>> void fn( char ch ){...}
>>>
>>> is now ambiguous for the call, so the only option is to remove the
>>> second proto.
>> That's right.
>
> And yet so wrong too.
That would be so wrong if such overloads were common. But I can't think
of much of any cases where one would want to write such overloads.
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list