Overloaded size_t operator

I am trying to compile a specific library, that apparently compiles fine for the author, but not for me. The following code demonstrates the problem (at least for me):

Code:

#include <iostream>

using namespace std;

class Test
{
public:
    inline void operator<<(unsigned long int val) {};
    inline void operator<<(size_t val) {};
};

int main(void)
{
}

Code:

Test.cpp:9: error: ‘void Test::operator<<(size_t)’ cannot be overloaded
Test.cpp:8: error: with ‘void Test::operator<<(long unsigned int)’

My compiler version details:

Code:

Using built-in specs.
Target: x86_64-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,treelang --prefix=/usr --enable-shared --with-system-zlib 
--libexecdir=/usr/lib --without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix --enable-nls --with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/4.2 --program-suffix=-4.2 
--enable-clocale=gnu --enable-libstdcxx-debug --enable-objc-gc --enable-mpfr --enable-checking=release --build=x86_64-linux-gnu --host=x86_64-
linux-gnu --target=x86_64-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.2.3 (Ubuntu 4.2.3-2ubuntu7)

He and I are both using gcc 4.2.3.

As far as I can tell, the error is because 'size_t' is effectively the same as 'unsigned long'? Should I be able to compile this code, and/or is there some way that I can make it compile (other than removing one of the overloads)? Cheers.

Joe

Unfortunately, there is no definition for size_t.
It is up to the library implementors to define what type size_t is, so you cannot rely on it being unsigned long. It can be unsigned long long, or even unsigned char, as well.

But surely if I'm compiling exactly the same code as them, 'size_t' should be defined the same for both of us? I included iostream in the example because it seemed that was where size_t was defined the library code. I suppose it could have been defined elsewhere, but seeing as I get the same error compiling this code as I do the library, it would seem size_t is defined as unsigned long in any case.

Originally Posted by hpesoj

But surely if I'm compiling exactly the same code as them, 'size_t' should be defined the same for both of us?

Not if you use different compilers.

I included iostream in the example because it seemed that was where size_t was defined the library code. I suppose it could have been defined elsewhere, but seeing as I get the same error compiling this code as I do the library, it would seem size_t is defined as unsigned long in any case.

It depends on the compiler.
On VC++, std::size_t is defined as unsigned int.

He states that they both use gcc 4.2.3

I pinpoint the facts. There may be something else amiss, but I would not overload an operator with size_t and then another operator. It can cause problems on other compilers.
But I'm not an error on GCC errors, so I cannot say what exactly the error is.

Is your friend on x86_64 too?