Created on 2014-10-05.00:00:00 last changed 49 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 220.127.116.11 [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 (18.104.22.168 [dcl.fct]) is “function taking no parameter returning conversion-type-id”.
as it implies that a conversion function might not be a member function.
|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|