home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM!taumet!clamage
- From: clamage@taumet.eng.sun.com (Steve Clamage)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: Quick questions
- Date: 26 Mar 1996 18:56:35 GMT
- Organization: Carolian Systems, Toronto ON
- Approved: clamage@eng.sun.com (comp.std.c++)
- Message-ID: <315837ce.67891262@sqarc.sq.com>
- References: <4j5b26$1e7a@mule1.mindspring.com> <4j7a64$l9i@engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: taumet.eng.sun.com
- X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99d/32.182
- Content-Length: 676
- X-Lines: 18
-
- clamage@Eng.sun.com (Steve Clamage) wrote:
-
- >>2) From a previous post on this group, it looks like the standard will
- >>allow one to define conversion operators for pre-existing, source code
- >>untouchable data types. Yes? No? What will this look like? I have the
- >>May copy of the WP, and don't see any mention of this.
- >
- >I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. If you mean can you define
- >a conversion operator from a user-defined class to a predefined type
- >like int or double, then yes, that has long been part of C++.
-
- I believe he was referring to something like
-
- class myclass{};
- operator int(const myclass &arg);
-
- Just like the global equality operators, etc.
-
-
-
- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles: try just posting with ]
- [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
- [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]
- [ Policy: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
- [ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu ]
-