This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: EGCS: pointer to member functions.
- To: oliva at dcc dot unicamp dot br
- Subject: Re: EGCS: pointer to member functions.
- From: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at mira dot isdn dot cs dot tu-berlin dot de>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 01:33:09 +0200
- CC: mrs at wrs dot com, brendan at dgs dot monash dot edu dot au, egcs at egcs dot cygnus dot com
- References: <199906151444.HAA22219@kankakee.wrs.com> <or674przu3.fsf@saci.lsd.dcc.unicamp.br>
> Yup, no problem. You can decide what to do when the pointer is
> created. If the method is non-virtual, you can just take its address
> directly. If not, you could take the address of an implicitly-defined
> non-virtual method that works just like a thunk. This non-virtual
> method could be handled just like template functions, in terms of
> implicit instantiation, so I don't see a problem here. Is there any
> flaw in my reasoning?
How do you implement contravariant assignment of pointer-to-method?
Regards,
Martin