🚀 go-pugleaf

David Vandevoorde (vandevod@cs.rpi.edu) wrote:
: >>>>> "JH" == "john (j d ) hickin" <hickin@bnr.ca> writes:
: [...]
: JH> A recent thread in another newsgroup has aroused some interest.
: JH> Lately there has been a small debate around the interpretation of
: JH> the following phrase, ostensibly taken from the DWP:

: JH> 	A reference shall be initialized to refer to a valid object or
: JH>     function.

: I checked and could find no such wording. Instead, I found:

:   [dcl.init.ref] 8.5.3/1
:   A  variable  declared  to  be  a  T&,  that  is
:   "reference to type T"
:   (_dcl.ref_), shall be initialized by an object, or function,
:   of type T
:   or by an object that can be converted into a T.

: JH> One party claims that valid object means initialized object while
: JH> another claims that all is required is that the object have a
: JH> valid address.

: JH> Does the DWP make it clear which interpretation should be used?

: I'm not at all sure that the DWP uses the phrase `valid object' at
: all. If it did, I would expect it to mean `an object whose lifetime
: has begun and not expired'; the lifetime of an object is defined in
: [basic.life].

From April public draft.

8.3.2 [dcl.ref] /4

"A reference shall be initialized to refer to a valid object or
												^^^^^
function.  In particular, null references are prohibited; ..."

IMHO it is a verbose lead-in to the next sentence which really says
something.

John
---
[ 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                             ]