This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Subject: Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions
- From: "Yu Zhang/CanWest/IBM" <yuzhang at ca dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 11:15:22 -0700
Hi,
Thank you all. Now I know where I got it wrong. I didn't know that
we need to use & to form a pointer to member.
------------
Yu Zhang
02/0CW1/4611/BURN
IBM Canada Pacific Development Centre(PDC)
4611 Canada Way, Burnaby, B.C. Canada V5G 4X3
Phone: (604) 297-3108 Fax:(604)297-3020
E-mail: yuzhang@ca.ibm.com
Nathan Sidwell
<nathan@codesou To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@codesourcery.com>
rcery.com> cc: Yu Zhang/CanWest/IBM@IBMCA, Phil Edwards
Sent by: <pedwards@disaster.jaj.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
gcc-owner@gcc.g Subject: Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions
nu.org
08/22/2001
03:39 AM
Please respond
to Nathan
Sidwell
Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
>
> "Yu Zhang/CanWest/IBM" <yuzhang@ca.ibm.com> writes:
>
> | Hi Phil,
> |
> | Thank you very much. It does work! But I'm confused,
> | which one is C++ standard?
> | server.use(T::foo); or server.use(&T::foo); ?
>
> &T::foo.
This is correct to pointer to (non-static) member function. In Yu's
case, T::foo is a static member, so the & is optional. Confusing, n'est
pas?
2.95 got this wrong when T::foo was overloaded.
For the record, refer to [5.3.1]/2 on how to form a pointer to member.
nathan
--
Dr Nathan Sidwell :: http://www.codesourcery.com :: CodeSourcery
LLC
'But that's a lie.' - 'Yes it is. What's your point?'
nathan@codesourcery.com : http://www.cs.bris.ac.uk/~nathan/ :
nathan@acm.org