From: Noel Yap (Noel.Yap_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-04 06:41:22
Floris van den Berg wrote:
> > Yes, a reference is an alias. OTOH, the fact that this is the
> > definition implies that it will act like an implicitly dereferenced
> > pointer. I just prefer to think of it the other way around (so there's
> > less memorization involved) -- if a reference is an implicitly
> > dereferenced pointer, it must be an alias to an existing object,
> > regardless of how that object is allocated.
>
> We seem to agree, but in different wordings. Shall we go back to the *real*
> subject? :)
Sure :-)
Noel