Created on 2001-07-05.00:00:00 last changed 208 months ago
[Moved to DR at October 2002 meeting.]
Proposed Resolution (4/02):
Add to 11.4.8.3 [class.conv.fct] as a new paragraph 7:
Conversion functions cannot be declared static.
May user-defined conversion functions be static? That is, should this compile?
class Widget {
public:
static operator bool() { return true; }
};
All my compilers hate it. I hate it, too. However, I don't see anything in 11.4.8.3 [class.conv.fct] that makes it illegal. Is this a prohibition that arises from the grammar, i.e., the grammar doesn't allow "static" to be followed by a conversion-function-id in a member function declaration? Or am I just overlooking something obvious that forbids static conversion functions?
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2008-10-05 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: wp -> cd1 |
| 2003-04-25 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: dr -> wp |
| 2002-11-08 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg777 |
| 2002-11-08 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: ready -> dr |
| 2002-05-10 00:00:00 | admin | set | messages: + msg616 |
| 2002-05-10 00:00:00 | admin | set | status: open -> ready |
| 2001-07-05 00:00:00 | admin | create | |