home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!wupost!gumby!destroyer!caen!sdd.hp.com!hp-cv!ogicse!das-news.harvard.edu!spdcc!dirtydog.ima.isc.com!newsserver.pixel.kodak.com!kodak!sunshine!cok
- From: cok@sunshine.Kodak.COM (David Cok)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: downcast
- Keywords: downcast, covariant return types
- Message-ID: <1992Jul24.193952.6400@kodak.kodak.com>
- Date: 24 Jul 92 19:39:52 GMT
- References: <dpg.711421775@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU> <1992Jul20.050017.16052@mole-end>
- Sender: news@kodak.kodak.com
- Organization: Eastman Kodak Co., Rochester, NY
- Lines: 11
-
- >In article <dpg.711421775@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU>, dpg@extro.ucc.su.OZ.AU (D P Gilbert) writes:
- >
- >> ...
- >> This posting is canvassing ideas about downcasts and if the "covariant
- >> return type on virtual functions" approved by the ISO C++ committee can
- >> be used to make them a wee bit safer. Consider:
-
- When I look at the downcasts that I currently need to do, nearly all of them
- will be unnecessary after support for covariant return types is implemented.
-
- David Cok
-