🚀 go-pugleaf

In article 67891262@sqarc.sq.com, clamage@taumet.eng.sun.com (Steve Clamage) writes:
>clamage@Eng.sun.com (Steve Clamage) wrote:

>>>2) From a previous post on this group, it looks like the standard will
>>>allow one to define conversion operators for pre-existing, source code
>>>untouchable data types.  Yes? No? What will this look like? I have the
>>>May copy of the WP, and don't see any mention of this.
>>
>>I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. If you mean can you define
>>a conversion operator from a user-defined class to a predefined type
>>like int or double, then yes, that has long been part of C++.

>I believe he was referring to something like

>class myclass{};
>operator int(const myclass &arg);
>
>Just like the global equality operators, etc.

That is not allowed. A type conversion function must be a member of a class.

class myclass {
public:
	operator int(); // converts a myclass to an int
	myclass(int); // converts an int to a myclass
};

---
Steve Clamage, stephen.clamage@eng.sun.com




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