With regard to Herb's GOTW #64...

In C++ 2003, is it still the case that one cannot portably create a pointer
to a Standard Library member function?  If so, is this likely to change in
C++ 0X?

Thanks,
Dave


---
[ 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                       ]

better_cs_now@yahoo.com ("Dave") writes:

> With regard to Herb's GOTW #64...
>
> In C++ 2003, is it still the case that one cannot portably create a pointer
> to a Standard Library member function?

Yes. (Here is a thread:
groups.google.com/groups?threadm=MPG.136adff4c74fcd209896e3@news.supernews.com
)

and see 17.4.4.4/2, which hasn't changed in TC1.

> If so, is this likely to change in
> C++ 0X?
[snip]

I don't know of any proposals ...

---
[ 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                       ]

Dave wrote:
>
> In C++ 2003, is it still the case that one cannot portably create a pointer
> to a Standard Library member function?  If so, is this likely to change in
> C++ 0X?
>

The actual rule is that implementors are allowed to add default
arguments to non-virtual standard library member functions. No, it's not
likely to change.

--

Pete Becker
Dinkumware, Ltd. (http://www.dinkumware.com)

---
[ 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                       ]