🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <FOX.90Aug15101045@devo.allegra.att.com> fox@allegra.att.com (David Fox) writes:
>In porting code from g++ to cfront I have come across the following
>inconsistancy.  The following program compiles as-is in g++
>
>	class A {
>	public:
>	  void f(int);
>	};
>	
>	class B : public A {
>	public:
>	  void f(char*);
>	//void f(int i) {A::f(i);}
>	};
>	
>	main()
>	{
>	  B x;
>	  x.f(3);
>	}
>
>And the call to x.f(3) finds the function f in class A.  In
>cfront, however, the function f in class B "masks" the f in
>class A, so you need the commented f(int) member function to 
>get this to compile.  To me, the g++ semantics make more sense.
>Do others agree?

I feel as you do.  B::f(char *) shouldn't override A::f(int).
Unfortunately Zortech (2.06) doesn't aggree.  It works as cfront does.

I would think that overriding would take place using the mangled name.
Thus f(int) would be completely different than f(char *).
-- 
"I liked him better before he died" - McCoy, ST V
===============================================================================
Dave Astels            |  Internet: 880716a@AcadiaU.CA
PO Box 835, Wolfville, |  Bitnet:   880716a@Acadia