From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ab1d177a5a26577d
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.glorb.com!news2.glorb.com!transit3.readnews.com!textspool1.readnews.com!news-out.readnews.com!postnews7.readnews.com!not-for-mail
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 16:45:24 -0500
From: Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: What's wrong with C++?
References: 
 <1ee1a434-4048-48f6-9f5e-d8126bebb808@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
	<4D5C1824.3020509@obry.net>
	<21443638-5ec6-49d4-aafe-6fbc1e59daba@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com>
	<b9455b1f-1db2-4e10-bdb7-13b0e305d7a6@h40g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
	<87d2371e-af91-4d6a-8d5b-3ddb972d84fd@k17g2000pre.googlegroups.com>
	<op.vq18691rule2fv@douda-yannick>
 <87zkpuze5e.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>	<4d5d791f$0$17330$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
	<87vd0izba1.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<4d5d8112$0$17330$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
	<87pqqqz8o6.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
	<4d5d8d41$0$17330$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
 <87lj1ez6rj.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
In-Reply-To: <87lj1ez6rj.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <4d5d96f8$0$17330$882e7ee2@usenet-news.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: b724704d.usenet-news.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=?`I^_aCBeQ;4@K7B>b86h=QFZ3T]GPM]7mX0AG3X_jU?iEKWiPgeB15VjKk:Lk^BN1cR12TN^Bg7>:KNd2lZeh5<Kl<kBnQ3X<9
X-Complaints-To: abuse@usenet-news.net
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:17377
Date: 2011-02-17T16:45:24-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2/17/2011 4:32 PM, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> Hyman Rosen writes on comp.lang.ada:
>> How is that automatic? It is explicitly converted back through
>>      DamageType::E( expression )
>
> Because, unless my C++ is really rusty, this is not a conversion.  It is
> an explicit call to the (implicitly defined) copy constructor
>
> DamageType::E (DamageType::E&)
>
> where the parameter, of type int, is automatically converted to
> DamageType::E&.
>
> An explicit type conversion would look like:
>
>    (DamageType::E) expression

Sorry, but your C++ is really rusty. The two forms are equivalent.
5.2.3/1 says
     A simple-type-specifier (7.1.5) followed by a parenthesized
     expression-list constructs a value of the specified type given
     the expression list. If the expression list is a single
     expression, the type conversion expression is equivalent (in
     definedness, and if defined in meaning) to the corresponding
     cast expression (5.4).




>
>>> Except that the value of what_my_dragon_can_do is not one of the
>>> values defined in the type.
>>
>> Once again, this is a design decision made by those who brought
>> enumerations into C. The value an enumeration may take is not
>> restricted to being one of the enumerators because the language wants
>> to support using enumeration literals as bitmasks. You may not like
>> it, but this use is correct C++.
>
> Agreed.  That was my point: C++ is a dangerous language, by design.
>