On Tue, 2008-06-03 at 12:16 -0400, Alan Conway wrote: > Robert Greig wrote: > > 2008/6/3 Robert Greig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > >> be, well, private). It is a while since I have done any C++ but I seem > >> to recall that Microsoft tightened up VS 2005 so that it rejected > >> this.
As I've said elsewhere, this is not about casting to private bases at all. The issue is about _dynamic_casting_ when private bases are involved. Of course the only thing that can cast to a private base is the class itself, that's not the issue here. > > > > In fact I just searched MSDN and found this page which confirms that > > VS 2005 and later do not allow this: > > > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235606.aspx > > > > RG > > Yup, I'm pretty sure gcc is wrong here, except for a very confusing > discussion I > found on comp.std.c++. What is obvious though is that portable code should > not > depend on dynamic_casting to private bases. I've no idea if gcc is wrong, but the only casting to a private base in the code is allowed by the Sun compiler too. The issue is about the dynamic typing not the static typing. Andrew > >
