Reasons for current function overload spec

[Robert DaSilva]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Sean Reque wrote:
>> I did a search on this forum for function overloading and for
>> HiddenFunc and I didn't find anything, so I thought I would pose the
>> question: is everyone generally agreed that the way function
>> overloading works in 2.0 is a good idea?
>> I think anything that can cause runtime errors is generally something
>> to be avoided, and reading about how HiddenFuncErrors can be raised
>> threw up red flags for me as a bad thing. I can understand wanting to
>> simpify things over C++, but not being able to access publicly
>> declared super class member functions, not for technical reasons, but
>> because of language design, and even worse, not revealing the errors
>> until runtime, seems to me like something that will cause more
>> problems in the long run than anything else. Today I finally got gtkD
>> to compile and run successfully on the dmd 2.008 compiler, and much
>> time was spent figuring out how to get a debugger working so I could
>> get a stack trace to track down a HiddenFuncError in a very long class
>> hierarchy so I could put in the correct alias declaration in the right
>> class. This kind of problem certainly doesn't exist in Java and C# as
>> far as I'm aware.
> 
> Do you mean function overloading or overriding?
> 
> 
> Sean

HiddenFuncError is cause by overriding overloaded functions so I would
say both.