🚀 go-pugleaf

Suppose that you have the following classes:

    class Base {
    public:
	virtual void f();
    }

    class Derived: public Base {
    public:
	virtual void f();
    }

and, elsewhere, you have the following overloaded functions:

    void g (Base &arg);
    void g (Derived &arg);

Clearly, dynamic binding can be used as follows:

    Base *b1, b2;
    Derived d1;

    b1 = &b2;
    b1->f();       // Calls f() in Base class
    (*b1).f();     // Calls f() in Base class
    b1 = &d1;
    b1->f();       // Calls f() in Derived class
    (*b1).f();     // Calls f() in Derived class

Now, consider this:

    b1 = &b2;
    g(*b1);        // Calls g(Base &arg)
    b1 = &d1;
    g(*b1);        // STILL calls g(Base &arg), even though *b1 is a Derived
		   // object!

Why is it that *b1 is treated as a Derived object when it is the invoking
object, but as a Base object when it is the argument?  Is this intentional?
It seems somewhat inconsistent to me.  Is there some way to dynamically bind
to the overloaded g() based on its argument type?

--
     John Townsend                 Internet:   johnt@meaddata.com
 c/o Mead Data Central             UUCP:       ...!uunet!meaddata!skibum!johnt
     P.O. Box 933                  Telephone:  (513) 865-7250 
  Dayton, Ohio, 45401