Thanks Paul for your prompt reply and the explaination of the problem. Yes, actually the problem got solved by changing the const'ness of the last param. Still thinking why didn't gcc 2.95 complained for the same!!
With Regards, Raj Paul Pluzhnikov wrote: > "whizz_kid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Can anyone please tell me whats happenning here....?? > > The result of a cast is not an l-value, and can't be bound to > non-const reference. > > Consider: > > short s; > int &r = (int)s; > r = 0xFFFFFFFF; > > If the compiler allowed binding 'r' to 's' (i.e. if &r == &s), > then the assignment to 'r' would have resulted in stack corruption > (assuming sizeof(short) < sizeof(int)). > > If Class1::function1() doesn't modify 'ret' parameter, make it > 'const TDF_U32 &'. > > If it does, you *must* supply a modifiable value of type TDF_U32; > you can't use '(TDF_U32)obj.retsend' any more then you can use > '(TDF_U32)42' ... > > Cheers, > -- > In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion. > Remove /-nsp/ for email. _______________________________________________ help-gplusplus mailing list help-gplusplus@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gplusplus
