Forwarding problem in base_from_member
Hello, the above class (doesn't?) currently addresses the forwarding problem by passing constructor argument by value. Would it not be a better idea to use const&? We can't pass variable references at the moment, can we? Cheers, Jens
On 1/9/05 2:50 PM, "Jens Theisen"
the above class (doesn't?) currently addresses the forwarding problem by passing constructor argument by value. Would it not be a better idea to use const&? We can't pass variable references at the moment, can we?
The forwarding problem looks like a C++ "flaw" that can't be solved trivially. So I'm not going to pretend to have a solution. Take a look at http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1385.htm for a description of the problem. (I saw the link in another thread.) I never checked how the constructors work with reference-based arguments, either const or non-const. (I guess that const references could work since they can take conversion-generated temporaries.) -- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com
Daryle Walker wrote:
The forwarding problem looks like a C++ "flaw" that can't be solved trivially. So I'm not going to pretend to have a solution. Take a look at http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1385.htm for a description of the problem. (I saw the link in another thread.)
I have read this paper; I just though that the way the forwarding problem in base_from_member is addressed is not the best solution.
I never checked how the constructors work with reference-based arguments, either const or non-const. (I guess that const references could work since they can take conversion-generated temporaries.)
Yes. The usual constructor wrappers I have seen so far therefore take const&. However, I do not know if there might be any other subtle catches. Cheers, Jens
participants (2)
-
Daryle Walker -
Jens Theisen