http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8114



--- Comment #14 from Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> 2012-05-19 17:49:37 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> (In reply to comment #12)
> > What dictionary are you going by?
> 
> C++'s, since that's the only one I've seen that ever mentions the phrase
> "pointer to member". :P

There you go.  This explains only what the phrase means in a C++ context.

In a more general context, there's nothing to say a "pointer to member" must be
a distinct type.

Suppose this issue is fixed by implementing the points of comment 10.  Then
&Test.foo is a pointer to a member of Test.  It being just a void
function(Test), rather than some other, distinct but semantically equivalent
type doesn't change this fact.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to