From: Douglas Gregor (gregod_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-15 15:45:52
On Friday 15 November 2002 03:36 pm, Gennaro Prota wrote:
> of inventing a separate concept (say "Addressable") for them. The problem I
> see in your resolution is that AFAIK addressof() is not guaranteed to work
> by the standard. Yes, it has an extremely high probability to do the right
> thing, but not a guarantee.
You'll have to back that up with some standardese. AFAICT, 5.2.10/10 lets
"That is, a reference cast reinterpret_cast<T&>(x) has the same effect as
the conversion *reinterpret_cast<T*>(&x) with the builtin & and * operators."
(And that reinterpret casting T* -> U* -> T* preserves the original value).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk