🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <451nu2$ocp@news.jf.intel.com> Cindy Ward <\"Cynthia_Ward_at_jfccm14\"@ccm.jf.intel.com> writes:

> I was susprised to read in your FAQ that C-style casts are now 
> deprecated. To the best of my memory (and I freely admit that I haven't 
> attended an X3J16/WG21 meeting since July 1994 in Kitchner), the decision 
> was to add new-style casts *without* deprecating C-style casts (because 
> the strawman motion to deprecate C-style casts was resoundingly voted 
> down). I also scanned through Appendix C ("Compatibility") of the April 
> WP and didn't see a mention of deprecation of C-style casts there.

Sorry, I really shouldn't have used the word "deprecated": as Cindy
points out, it has a very specific meaning.  (A feature that is
deprecated, for example, is likely to be removed from the language
in a future revision---in principle, at any rate.)  And, indeed,
C-style casts haven't been deprecated.

I really just meant that there is no longer any reason to use C-style
casts in C++: anything that you could use C-style casts for, you can
also do with static_cast, dynamic_cast, const_cast, and
reinterpret_cast.  New style casts are a clearer and safer
replacement.
-- 
  Matt Austern                             He showed his lower teeth.  "We 
  matt@physics.berkeley.edu                all have flaws," he said, "and 
  http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt             mine is being wicked."

[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  The moderation policy
  is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]