Re: strange looking ambiguity with type cast
Re: strange looking ambiguity with type cast
- Subject: Re: strange looking ambiguity with type cast
- From: GoochRules! <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:35:02 -0700
On Feb 11, 2004, at 2:17 PM, jean-frangois gauthier wrote:
maybe i'm simply missing something, here. why is gcc trying to use a's
constructor in the first place? aren't (a) _b and _b. operator a ()
strictly equivalent? is it possible that gcc might be confusing a (_b)
and (a) _b?
jean-frangois
I think what you're missing is that there's a unnamed temporary of type
a created during (a) _b, because operator a() returns an a& by
definition.
So, gcc isn't confusing a::a(b) with b::operator a(), it simply need to
know whether to call b::operator a() or b::operator int() to pass to
the appropriate constructor for a.
_______________________________________________
xcode-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/xcode-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.