[Rivet] inRange trouble

[Hendrik Hoeth]

Thus spake Andy Buckley (andy.buckley at ed.ac.uk):

> >So, what do we do? Right now the function is templated, so that the
> >first three arguments have the same type. Adding an inRange(double,<T>,<T>)
> >won't work, because it introduces an ambiguity. Getting rid of the
> >templates altogether means we need to introduce a loooong list of
> >inRange functions.
> 
> Do we really? If we have an explicit (int, int, int) and a (double,
> double, double), won't implicit conversion do the rest?

ATLAS_2011_I919017.cc:780:42: error: call of overloaded 'inRange(double, int, int)' is ambiguous
ATLAS_2011_I919017.cc:780:42: note: candidates are:
../../include/Rivet/Math/MathUtils.hh:108:15: note: bool Rivet::inRange(double, double, double, Rivet::RangeBoundary, Rivet::RangeBoundary)
../../include/Rivet/Math/MathUtils.hh:132:15: note: bool Rivet::inRange(int, int, int, Rivet::RangeBoundary, Rivet::RangeBoundary)


-- 
A man without a dream in his heart already has one foot in the grave.