From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-11-21 14:14:45
Eric Niebler wrote:
> I recently discovered something new (to me) about rvalues and const
> volatile references. It seems an rvalue will not bind to one. This
> property can be used to prevent misuses such as the one above.
New to me too.
> To solve John's problem, regex_match() can be defined to take a
> "std::string const volatile &", and then it merely casts the volatile
> away inside.
Yikes a const_cast.
> (Note: this doesn't work on any msvc compilers, which will happily
> bind temporaries to const volatile references.)
:-(
I don't suppose that there is any way to poison the existing overloads
with functions that *only* bind to rvalues?
Just checking :-)
Thanks,
John.