"Walter Bright" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in news:dfnd79$qhg$1@digitaldaemon.com:
> "Wlodzimierz Skiba" <abx@abx.art.pl> wrote in message news:dfm9gi$2q8j$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> I know that it is poor prove that it is not ambigous for all other
> compilers.
>> So perhaps... is that important that testString(int) is _private_ ?
>> Can it
> be
>> accessed in assignemnt outside testString class?
> 
> No, member access is checked for only after method selection.

No, it is not important or no, it shouldn't be accessed ?

ABX

"Walter Bright" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in news:dfnd7a$qhg$2@digitaldaemon.com:
> > BTW: Comeau online in strict mode doesn't report any ambiguity.
> 
> Which one does it pick?

Sorry, I'm not sure I understand your question...
I meant that all: Open Watcom, GCC of MinGW, Borland and VC silently accepted
original wxWidgets code and once I striped it down (as posted earlier + public ctor
testString() as mentioned) Comeau Online C++ compiled my minimal sample without
error. Only DMC 8.45.5 reported "Error: ambiguous reference to symbol".

I will be now off-line until tomorrow so I just hope it clarifies things for your investigation.

ABX

"W³odzimierz Skiba" <abx@abx.art.pl> wrote in message news:dfmjo5$2g3$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> So I have no idea how to duplicate that problem with lst file and follow
your
> scenario. My access to the net is limited to follow immediatelly your
answers so if
> you want to duplicate this problem yourself I have packaged this cpp file
together
> with all non DMC headers and together with bat script which contains
command line
> taken from wxWidgets makefile modified to this independent package. This
zip still
> caused Internal error: eh 759.
>
> http://www.abx.art.pl/wx/dmc_eh_759.zip (~440 KB)

Ok, I have that one solved now. Just for entertainment value, the minimal test case to reproduce it turned out to be:


struct wxObject
{
    virtual ~wxObject() {  }
};

struct wxListItemAttr
{
    wxObject m_colText,  m_colBack;
    ~wxListItemAttr() { }
};

struct wxListItem
{
    ~wxListItem() { delete m_attr; }
    wxListItemAttr *m_attr;
};

void UpdateFiles()
{
    wxListItem item;
}

"W³odzimierz Skiba" <abx@abx.art.pl> wrote in message news:dfne0h$pkn$2@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Walter Bright" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in
news:dfnd7a$qhg$2@digitaldaemon.com:
> > > BTW: Comeau online in strict mode doesn't report any ambiguity.
> >
> > Which one does it pick?
>
> Sorry, I'm not sure I understand your question...

I meant which of the following conversion sequences does it pick:

    testRegKey => operator bool => testString(int)

or:

    testRegKey => operator testString => testString(const testString&)

"W³odzimierz Skiba" <abx@abx.art.pl> wrote in message news:dfndla$pkn$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Walter Bright" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in news:dfnd79$qhg$1@digitaldaemon.com:
> > "Wlodzimierz Skiba" <abx@abx.art.pl> wrote in message news:dfm9gi$2q8j$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >> I know that it is poor prove that it is not ambigous for all other
> > compilers.
> >> So perhaps... is that important that testString(int) is _private_ ?
> >> Can it
> > be
> >> accessed in assignemnt outside testString class?
> >
> > No, member access is checked for only after method selection.
>
> No, it is not important or no, it shouldn't be accessed ?

I meant that member access is irrelevant to overload resolution.

"Walter Bright" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in news:dfnspm$19ks$2@digitaldaemon.com:
> I meant which of the following conversion sequences does it pick:
> 
>     testRegKey => operator bool => testString(int)
> 
> or:
> 
>     testRegKey => operator testString => testString(const testString&)

I don't think I can check this with Comeau online :(
The expected behaviour was operator testString since when this code apeared in
April. I will forward this thread to the author of the original code to check if he
has any additional info to add.

ABX

"W³odzimierz Skiba" <abx@abx.art.pl> wrote in message news:dfoqh3$25jl$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Walter Bright" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in
news:dfnspm$19ks$2@digitaldaemon.com:
> > I meant which of the following conversion sequences does it pick:
> >
> >     testRegKey => operator bool => testString(int)
> >
> > or:
> >
> >     testRegKey => operator testString => testString(const testString&)
>
> I don't think I can check this with Comeau online :(
> The expected behaviour was operator testString since when this code
apeared in
> April. I will forward this thread to the author of the original code to
check if he
> has any additional info to add.

I've adjusted the compiler so it picks operator testString. I'll post a new beta shortly. The internal error is fixed, too.