Re: [boost] Re: Re: dangerous_cast<>

From: Gabriel Dos Reis (gdr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-12-09 18:19:26

"David B. Held" <dheld_at_[hidden]> writes:

[...]

| 2) Under what circumstances is the following equivalent to the
| above:
| 
| reinterpret_cast<T*>(p);

One of the issues that distinguishly arose during this disucssion is
whether 

   reinterpret_cast<void*>(ptr)

is well-formed.  (My compilers don't reject it).

If it is well-formed, is-it equivalent to static_cast<void*>(ptr)?

Is reinterpret_cast<char*>(ptr) equivalent to reinterpret_cast<void*>(ptr)?

Does reinterpret_cast<char*>(ptr) == static_cast<void*>(ptr) hold?

What does 5.2.10/1 really mean?

| 
| A) Always
| B) Implementation-defined
| C) Never
| D) Other
| 
| Is that a reasonable statement of the problem?

I think it is a good start.

-- Gaby