This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions

To: Nathan Sidwell <nathan at codesourcery dot com>
Subject: Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>
Date: 22 Aug 2001 12:43:32 +0200
Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>, Yu Zhang/CanWest/IBM <yuzhang at ca dot ibm dot com>, Phil Edwards <pedwards at disaster dot jaj dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
References: <OF300A8A95.636C4469-ON85256AAF.005B61A9@mkm.can.ibm.com> <fly9ocy7m9.fsf@jambon.cmla.ens-cachan.fr> <3B838BF1.4775E6B5@codesourcery.com>

Nathan Sidwell <nathan@codesourcery.com> writes:

| 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.

I stand corrected.  I missed the 'static' bit.

-- Gaby
CodeSourcery, LLC                       http://www.codesourcery.com

References:
- Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions
  - From: Yu Zhang/CanWest/IBM
- Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: c++/4047: assuming & on overloaded member functions
  - From: Nathan Sidwell

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]