Created on 2014-10-05.00:00:00 last changed 95 months ago
[Moved to DR at the October, 2015 meeting.]
Proposed resolution (May, 2015):
This issue is resolved by the resolution of issue 1990.
The statement in 11.4.8.2 [class.conv.ctor] paragraph 1,
No return type can be specified.
is confusing, since a conversion operator has a return type. It would be more precise to phrase the restriction in terms of the permissible decl-specifiers in the function's decl-specifier-seq. The next sentence is also problematic,
If a conversion function is a member function, the type of the conversion function (9.3.4.6 [dcl.fct]) is “function taking no parameter returning conversion-type-id”.
as it implies that a conversion function might not be a member function.
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2017-02-06 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: dr -> cd4 |
| 2015-11-10 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg6075 |
| 2015-11-10 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: ready -> dr |
| 2015-05-25 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg5458 |
| 2015-05-25 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: drafting -> ready |
| 2014-10-05 00:00:00 | admin | create | |