[LLVMdev] next

[Howard Hinnant]

On Nov 16, 2009, at 4:42 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:

> 
> On Nov 16, 2009, at 10:49 AMPST, Howard Hinnant wrote:
> 
>> On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Nov 14, 2009, at 3:16 PMPST, Howard Hinnant wrote:
>>> 
>>>> In many places there is code that looks like:
>>>> 
>>>>  MBBI = next(MBBI);
>>>> 
>>>> In C++0X there is a std::next that is likely to be in scope when these
>>>> calls are made. And due to ADL the above call becomes ambiguous:
>>>> llvm::next or std::next?
>>>> 
>>>> I recommend:
>>>> 
>>>>  MBBI = llvm::next(MBBI);
>>>> 
>>>> -Howard
>>> 
>>> "next" is a popular name; if it breaks llvm, I'd expect this standards change to break a lot of existing code.  Do you really want to do that?
>> 
>> I'm happy to open an LWG issue for you on this subject.
> 
> Eek.  I'm not sure I have enough background to be the driver on this; for example I didn't know what ADL was until I looked it up.  That's why I phrased it as a question.  At least you don't seem to think it's a dumb question:)

Despite the fact that I hear dumb answers all too often, I almost never come across a dumb question. :-)

-Howard