Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] Remembering that T(a) can cause dangerous conversion like a C-style cast
From: michi7x7 (michi_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-03 13:28:03


Hi,

> An essential question:
> Should boost::lambda::constructor<int>()("") compiles?

Definitely no.

> I have crafted a general replacement of T(a) as a workaround for
> dangerous conversions caused by T(a) which may happen in some kinds of
> templates.

There is already one in boost (Functional/Factory) AFAIK, but it might
has the same problem:
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_47_0/libs/functional/factory/doc/html/index.html

boost::value_factory<T>()(arg1,arg2,arg3)
// same as T(arg1,arg2,arg3)

> To avoid the unexpected conversion, I first proposed use of T{...} .
> But it is not a perfect solution because it changes the meaning in some
> cases like std::vector<int>.
But this is exactly the use-case T{...} was made for. Of course
initializer_lists make this approach completely unusable...

Another possible solution would be to use static_cast<T>(a) for one
constructor-argument, as static_cast is type-safe.

> As shown in the top of this message, I picked boost::lambda::constructor
> as a concrete example, and verified that the problem really exists in
> the wild.

Not if lambda::constructor was well written, but it's hard to take care
of all these pitfalls (typical C++).

> Thinking more, I wonder why such dangerous conversion was explicitly
> injected to T(a) in the first place. I first thought of some
> C-compatibility issues. But now I think it cannot be, because T(a) is a
> new construct in C++. Is it possible to remove this dangerous
> conversion path in a future revision of the standard?

T(a) is a function-style cast which was used in C, removing it would be
rather difficult.

HTH

michi7x7


Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk