On Sunday, February 2, 2003, at 03:48 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
Could someone review the motivations for wanting an implicit conversion to T* ? I'm failing to come up with any myself.Here is the problem:If T is not an array, the interface must supply: T& operator*() const; T* operator->() const; If T is an array && conversion to T* is not desired, the interface must supply: T& operator[](size_t i) const; If conversion to T* is desired, the interface must supply: operator T*() const; In other words, there are four interface combinations: When T is not an array && conversion to T* is not desired: T& operator*() const; T* operator->() const; When T is not an array && conversion to T* is desired: T& operator*() const; T* operator->() const; operator T*() const; When T is an array && conversion to T* is not desired: T& operator[](size_t i) const; When T is an array && conversion to T* is desired: operator T*() const;
Thanks,
-Howard
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost