From -1033408766142229929 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,8deb6f8d7372d4a3 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2004-04-10 09:10:45 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!newsrout1.ntli.net!news.ntli.net!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: c141592653589@hotmail.com (MJ) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: "explicit class" (proposal N1582) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 16:10:43 +0000 (UTC) Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 23 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: <423c153c.0404100707.57ee87ca@posting.google.com> References: <423c153c.0404070224.bd836ab@posting.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1081613444 8447 10.0.0.1 (10 Apr 2004 16:10:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 16:10:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.oz.au ([128.250.1.22]) by news.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BCL47-0002C5-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Sat, 10 Apr 2004 16:10:43 +0000 X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU with ESMTP id i3AGAfi2014892; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 02:10:41 +1000 (EST) X-Received: (from fjh@localhost) by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.12.10+Sun/8.12.9/Submit) id i3AGAfWK014883; Sun, 11 Apr 2004 02:10:41 +1000 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2004 15:07:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-mulga_r1 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.1 required=5.2 tests=ADDR_NUMS_AT_BIGSITE, FORGED_HOTMAIL_RCVD2,FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,FROM_WEBMAIL_END_NUMS6 autolearn=no version=2.60-mulga_r1 Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:1586 francis@robinton.demon.co.uk (Francis Glassborow) wrote in message news:... > >Furthermore, in an "explicit class" I would expect that the implicit > >conversion for constructors is turned off (as if the constructors were > >declared as "explicit"). Are constructors in an "explicit class" > >implicitly declared as explicit? > > There is a problem here in that we do not have a mechanism for switching > conversion behaviour back on. However as the author of the paper I am > considering how that option might be incorporated. Perhaps adding > '!explicit' and its equivalent 'not explicit' might serve without > costing another keyword. I would allow that for regular classes too. So compilers could generate warnings. Writing '!explicit' (or however the syntax might look) would then suppress the warning. --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]