🚀 go-pugleaf

Jerry Coffin <jcoffin@rmii.com> (08 Feb 96):

> claus@faerber.muc.de (Claus A. Faerber) wrote:
>
> >IMO there's a better way than 'operator.()':
>
> >Simply say: 'If a class member identifier is not found
> >within an object, all possible cast operators are scanned in
the order of declaration
> >order to find a conversion to an object of a class
> >containing a member with this identifier.'
>
> Which would be chosen if two or more possibilities would work?

In the order in which the cast operators appead in the class  
definition.

And cast-to classes should be scanned in the same manner as  
the original class in order to find the member, ie. if one  
class the object is casted to doesn't contain the member,  
but a cast op. to a class, which contains it, this path is  
choosen instead of the next cast of the original class.


Claus

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Claus Andre Faerber - claus@faerber.muc.de - http://www.muc.de/~cfaerber
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
  Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  Moderation policy:
  http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html. ]