This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: c++/9278: dependent type in conversion operator bug
- From: David Abrahams <dave at boost-consulting dot com>
- To: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ticam dot utexas dot edu>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>, <gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 19:14:07 -0500
- Subject: Re: c++/9278: dependent type in conversion operator bug
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301131701450.12325-100000@gandalf.ticam.utexas.edu>
Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth@ticam.utexas.edu> writes:
>> > http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/cwg_closed.html#18
>>
>> Another obscure difference between C and C++. In C you can use a typedef
>> to void here <http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/docs/dr_157.html>.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out. This makes it very clear that the code is
> illegal and should not compile.
>
> Indeed a very obscure feature. (Although, I must admit that, I desperately
> needed something like that not too long ago and had to invent various
> template metaprogramming hoops to work around...)
I needed exactly that yesterday, which is why it came up ;-)
Using SFINAE to rule out certain conversions was my game, but it
didn't fly :(
--
David Abrahams
dave@boost-consulting.com * http://www.boost-consulting.com
Boost support, enhancements, training, and commercial distribution