Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/10/01/20:25:13
Horst Kraemer wrote:
> You may _not_ omit the & operator because there is _no_ implicit
> conversion from a member function to pointer to member function,
> although there is an implicit conversion from a function to a pointer
> to function as in C.
Yes, I said that.
> Furthermore the C++ Standard explicitly states that an unqualified
> assigment
>
> p = &func;
>
> is not allowed, even not in the scope of the class.
Okay, I wasn't aware of that. (The C++ reference I had didn't have
anything to say on that issue, but it's the Ellis-Stroustrup reference,
so it's a little old.)
--
Erik Max Francis / email max AT alcyone DOT com / whois mf303 / icq 16063900
Alcyone Systems / irc maxxon (efnet) / finger max AT sade DOT alcyone DOT com
San Jose, CA / languages En, Eo / web http://www.alcyone.com/max/
USA / icbm 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W / &tSftDotIotE
\
/ The work will teach you how to do it.
/ (an Estonian proverb)
- Raw text -