EGCS: pointer to member functions.

[Martin v. Loewis]

> 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