Re: What are the arguments against this

<parag_paul@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193869961.246381.125040@e34g2000pro.googlegroups.com...


Your original code:

class C
{
void print();
}

main(){
C c1;

print(c1);

}

I think I finally understand. Instead of c1.print() you are doing
print(c1); Consider though.

class C
{
virtual void print();
virtual void print(int x);
};

class D
{
void print();
void print(int x);
operator int() { return 1; }
};

class E: public C
{
void print();
void print(int x);
};

void print( C c )
{
}

void print( int x )
{
}

int main()
{
   C c1;
   D d1;
   E e1;

   print(c1); // Which one does this call and why?
   print(d1); // Which one does this call and why?
   print(e1); // Which one does this call and why?
}

There are a lot of other scenarios I could come up with where it would be
arbitrary which print was called. So you'd have to come up with complicated
rules as to which one is called and why and it would just become a nightmare
as code wouldn't work as expected. Also, there may be print() declared in
other places. c1.print() states explicitly which print is to be called.
There is already some confusion with polymorphism, why add another layer
into the pot? I don't know the original reason this wasn't allowed, but I'm
glad it wasn't.