From 7109363407502320866 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,2011c154e12ede7e X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: vandevod@cs.rpi.edu (David Vandevoorde) Subject: Re: inconsistance in over.over Date: 1996/02/01 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 137519730 references: <4eo2mk$7tc@boy.nmd.msu.ru> x-original-date: 31 Jan 1996 23:24:23 -0500 organization: RPI Computer Science x-auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++ newsgroups: comp.std.c++ >>>>> "AK" == Alexander Krotoff writes: [...] AK> There is small inconsistance in the Oct 95 WP: AK> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- AK> 13.4 Address of overloaded function [over.over] AK> In the example on the end of the section: AK> int (X::*p5)(int) = &(X::f); // error: wrong syntax for AK> // pointer to member AK> int (*p6)(long) = &(X::f); // OK1 AK> Error: qualified-id enclosed in parentheses. AK> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- AK> 5.3.1 Unary operators [expr.unary.op] AK> 3 A pointer to member is only formed when an explicit & is used and AK> its operand is a qualified-id not enclosed in parentheses. AK> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- AK> I suppose the error is in the over.over. I fail to see the problem. 5.3.1 (which you quote correctly) says that &X::f could be a pointer to member, but not &(X::f); so that explains the error in 13.4. &(X::f) resolves to the pointer to a static member function (which is a pointer to a regular function) in that same example, so that's fine. Note that the target type resolves the overload. Daveed --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu. Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu. The moderation policy is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]