hum, right, I read your mail too fast. I too not understand why npos seems to be specialized here....perhaps _CharT is an alias to wchar_t, same for _Traits and _Alloc???? (a typedef, a define or any other thing?)
Thomas On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Bryan Ischo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Menguy wrote: > > Hi Bryan, > > > > check the stl standared: http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/basic_string.html > > > > > > > > static const size_type npos basic_string The largest possible value > > of type size_type. That is, size_type(-1). > > > > => npos is a constant defined by basic_string, and now look at the > > default constructor: > > basic_string(const basic_string& s, size_type pos = 0, size_type n = npos) > > > > > > so yes, for me have default equal to this is normal.... look at npos > > in your xml and you will see its definition. > > > > Hope this helps > > Thomas > > > > Yes, but since the class which contains the constructor which has the > argument which has the default is: > > basic_string<wchar_t, std::char_traits<wchar_t>, std::allocator<wchar_t> > > > Then shouldn't npos be identified as: > > std::basic_string<wchar_t, td::char_traits<wchar_t>, std::allocator<wchar_t> > >::npos > > instead of : > > std::basic_string<_CharT, _Traits, _Alloc>::npos > > ??? > > In other words, shouldn't the type of npos be identified by the actual > template parameter values used in declaring the template instance in which > npos is being referenced, instead of by the variable names used in the > template definition itself? > > Thanks, > Bryan > > > > _______________________________________________ gccxml mailing list [email protected] http://www.gccxml.org/mailman/listinfo/gccxml
