[C++-sig] Re: implicitly_convertible and char*
dleary at gmail.com
Thu Jul 8 23:31:43 CEST 2004
I guess I'm being a pain, but I still have my same problem.
I write saying that implicitly_convertible<X, char*> doesn't work.
Dave responds saying that char* is not a valid C++ string, that char
const * should work.
I amend my example to show that char const * does not work.
Thread gets a little sidetracked with "const char*" vs "char const *"
On Sat, 3 Jul 2004 14:23:07 -0400, Dusty Leary <dleary at gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah, that was an unrelated side note that someone else brought up...
> the issue is that implicity_convertible<X, const char*> is not working
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2004 14:19:27 -0400, David Abrahams
> <dave at boost-consulting.com> wrote:
> > Dusty Leary <dleary at gmail.com> writes:
> > > so, any news on this?
> > What news grould there be? char const* and const char* are the same
> > thing, so trying it won't make any difference.
> > > On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 20:49:39 -0400, David Abrahams
> > > <dave at boost-consulting.com> wrote:
> > >> "Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk at yahoo.com> writes:
> > >>
> > >> > I don't really feel competent in this matter, but I believe char const* and
> > >> > const char* are two different things. Did you try it with "const char*"?
> > >>
> > >> They are the same thing.
> > --
> > Dave Abrahams
> > Boost Consulting
> > http://www.boost-consulting.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > C++-sig mailing list
> > C++-sig at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/c++-sig
More information about the Cplusplus-sig