🚀 go-pugleaf

>>>>> Steve Clamage <clamage@Eng.Sun.COM> writes:

> In article rp3@mozart.wg.icl.co.uk, Adel El-Beik <A.El-Beik@man0506.wins.icl.co.uk> writes:
>> I have a question concerning MSVC++ v.4.00 and the April DWP C++.
>> 
>> The following code fails on MSVC++.  It doesn't like line labelled 1.
>> It complains with 
>> 
>> C:\array\array.cpp(16) : error C2664: 'func' : cannot convert parameter 1 
>> from 'long [2][2]' to 'const long [][2]' (new behavior; please see help)

> You have run into effectively the same rule that prohibits implicit
> conversion from "T**" to "const T**". That prohibition is not new,
> but is in the ISO/ANSI C standard, and has not been changed, since
> it would open a hole in the type system.

But converting long (*)[2] to const long (*)[2] is more like converting
long ** to const long *const * than it is like converting long ** to const
long **, because there is no way to modify the array -- there is, in fact,
no array entity in memory, only two longs.  A long (*)[2] points to two
longs, whereas a const long (*)[2] points to two const longs.  I don't see
a constness hole there.

I suspect this is an oversight.

Jason


[ 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                             ]