From: Erik Max Francis <max AT alcyone DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: C++ problem
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 17:14:08 -0700
Organization: Alcyone Systems
Lines: 28
Message-ID: <36141AD0.1E19817E@alcyone.com>
References: <6udqfn$sdk$1 AT inf6serv DOT rug DOT ac DOT be> <360A8B31 DOT 53CF31E9 AT earthlink DOT net> <36101229 DOT C4659B15 AT unb DOT ca> <3613D00E DOT 6B294297 AT alcyone DOT com> <3613f29c DOT 347205282 AT news DOT snafu DOT de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: kamali.alcyone.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.30 i586)
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

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)