Quote Originally Posted by nuzzle View Post
So either the added constructor doesn't change anything. It just replaces with overloading what the program did before by coercion (automatic conversion between int and double). Then you don't need to recompile. Or the added constructor does indeed change the program logic. Then you shouldn't recompile because this most certainly would introduce bugs.
So you are actually suggesting that the dependent code is never recompiled? That's a pretty hard constraint!
If the introduction of another constructor overload would cause a bug in other code, I would want to find out about that as soon as possible, rather than have it lingering.

The point to this whole exercise is that all of these situations [i]could[/b] recuire dependent code having to be recompiled. In a more specific case, you may be able to conclude that that is not necessary.