Article View: comp.std.c++
Article #690Re: implicit pointer of pointer argument promotion legal C++?
From: Andrew Koenig
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 04:55
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 04:55
12 lines
1004 bytes
1004 bytes
In article <1992Oct8.162653.12028@urbana.mcd.mot.com> qbarnes@urbana.mcd.mot.com (Quentin Barnes) writes: > I can't find in the 23-sep-91 ANSI-C++ draft if pointer of pointer > promotion is allowed or disallowed. Can anyone point me to the > appropriate reference(s) so I know whether cfront is broken or not? Converting T** to const T** had better not be legal in C++, because if it were, it would open a hole in the type system that would allow modification of genuinely constant objects. -- --Andrew Koenig ark@europa.att.com
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<23842@alice.att.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!uwm.edu!linac!att!att!allegra!alice!arkReferences:
<1992Oct8.162653.12028@urbana.mcd.mot.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!wupost!uwm.edu!linac!att!att!allegra!alice!ark From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: implicit pointer of pointer argument promotion legal C++? Message-ID: <23842@alice.att.com> Date: 9 Oct 92 04:55:41 GMT Article-I.D.: alice.23842 References: <1992Oct8.162653.12028@urbana.mcd.mot.com> Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP () Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ Lines: 12