From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-06-29 17:36:56
On Friday 29 June 2001 05:04, you wrote:
> Douglas Gregor <gregod_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Borland C++ seems to have a bug regarding template argument deduction
> > when dealing with function pointers. Consider this:
> >
> > template<typename T> void set(const T& t);
> > int foo(int, int) {};
> > // ...
> > set(&foo);
>
> I don't have enough context to be sure the following is the problem, but in
> this case:
>
> struct x{
> int foo(int,int) {};
> void z(){ set( &foo ); }
> };
>
> with Borland extensions on, Borland C++ treats &foo as a bound "closure__"
> to this->foo. You need to say set( &x::foo ) to get a straight member
> function pointer. I've never been sure how ANSI compliant that was..
>
> De-lurkingly yours,
>
> Ross.
I'm only dealing with free function pointers and static member pointers, so
closures shouldn't be getting in the way.
Doug