🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4gsvhn$csi@clarknet.clark.net> gusty@clark.net (Harlan
Messinger) writes:

|> Dirk Herrmann (dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de) wrote:
|> : Sorry if this has been discussed before.
|> : 
|> : When using templates, it appears that there should be
|> : default constructors for the fundamental data types.

|> Essentially, there is.

    [Example deleted...]

|> But it appears that it is allowed. It works fine in Visual C++ 2.2. 
    [...]

|> The following produces output of "8" on the first line and gobbledygook 
|> on the second line, since the effect of the "default constructor" of the 
|> integer member function is to do nothing.

This is wrong, but since it is a recent change, it is probable that
the compiler simply hasn't implemented it yet.

Expressions of the form `int()' have always been allowed.  A (fairly)
recent change to the draft standard states that they have the same
value as default static initialization (in this case, 0).  The earlier
rules had the initailization undefined.

--
James Kanze         Tel.: (+33) 88 14 49 00        email: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
GABI Software, Sarl., 8 rue des Francs-Bourgeois, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
Conseils, études et réalisations en logiciel orienté objet --
                -- A la recherche d'une activité dans une region francophone



[ comp.std.c++ is moderated.  To submit articles: Try just posting with your
                newsreader.  If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu
  comp.std.c++ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/faq.html
  Moderation policy: http://reality.sgi.com/austern/std-c++/policy.html
  Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu
]