>>>>> "RL" == Roman Lechtchinsky <wolfro@cs.tu-berlin.de> writes:
[...]
RL> In the present standard as well as in the April draft, there
RL> exists one rule which I don't like at all. Basically, the concept
RL> is that if several overloaded functions are defined in a class A
RL> and one of these functions is redefined in a derived class B this
RL> function hides all functions inherited from A that have the same
RL> name:
[...]

C++ look-up rules are already quite complicated. If this rule were
relaxed the way you suggest, I imagine things would get even worse
(I think you would have to define some kind of iteration between
name look-up and overload resolution).

 Daveed
---
[ To submit articles: try just posting with your news-reader.
                      If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  FAQ:      http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html
  Policy:   http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.
]