From: Howard Hinnant (hinnant_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-02-02 21:46:02
On Sunday, February 2, 2003, at 03:48 PM, Beman Dawes wrote:
> Here is the problem:
>
> If T is not an array, the interface must supply:
>
> T& operator*() const;
> T* operator->() const;
>
> If T is an array && conversion to T* is not desired, the
> interface must supply:
>
> T& operator[](size_t i) const;
>
> If conversion to T* is desired, the interface must supply:
>
> operator T*() const;
>
> In other words, there are four interface combinations:
>
> When T is not an array && conversion to T* is not desired:
>
> T& operator*() const;
> T* operator->() const;
>
> When T is not an array && conversion to T* is desired:
>
> T& operator*() const;
> T* operator->() const;
> operator T*() const;
>
> When T is an array && conversion to T* is not desired:
>
> T& operator[](size_t i) const;
>
> When T is an array && conversion to T* is desired:
>
> operator T*() const;
Could someone review the motivations for wanting an implicit conversion
to T* ? I'm failing to come up with any myself.
Thanks,
-Howard