From: Ben Artin (macdev_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-09-29 08:43:45
In article <BAY104-DAV1150B74243DE0C91E6C3DDBF8C0_at_phx.gbl>,
Daryle Walker <darylew_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Actually, under my opinion/theory, NO function, member function, or operator
> returns a const non-reference. That's includes the post-increment operator.
> However, I don't have the "Exceptional C++" book, so I don't know the
> author's reasoning for his opinion.
Implement a post-increment that returns a non-const, then see what x++++ does,
and you'll understand the reasoning :-)
-- I changed my name: <http://periodic-kingdom.org/People/NameChange.php>
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk