Re: returning lvalue in C vs C++
- From: "Phlip" <phlipcpp@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 13:45:02 GMT
Ben C wrote:
Ah, this was the part I was missing! You did mention it before, but not
with chapter and verse from the standard.
What about f().operator=(t)? If f().x = 42 works, then it should work,
right?
--
Phlip
http://www.greencheese.org/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!!
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: returning lvalue in C vs C++
- From: Ben C
- Re: returning lvalue in C vs C++
- Prev by Date: Re: N -ROOM LIGHTS PROBLEM
- Next by Date: Re: N -ROOM LIGHTS PROBLEM
- Previous by thread: Re: Cannot understand the following codes
- Next by thread: Re: returning lvalue in C vs C++
- Index(es):
