Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!wiley!poseidon!simpson
From: simpson@poseidon.uucp (Scott Simpson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Arguments to Overloaded Operators
Message-ID: <5023@wiley.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jun 89 03:48:16 GMT
References: <11032@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> <1100@cadillac.CAD.MCC.COM> <238@pink.ACA.MCC.COM> <868@tukki.jyu.fi> <244@pink.ACA.MCC.COM>
Sender: news@wiley.UUCP
Reply-To: simpson@poseidon.UUCP (Scott Simpson)
Organization: TRW Arcadia Project
Lines: 20

In article <244@pink.ACA.MCC.COM> rfg@pink.aca.mcc.com.UUCP (Ron Guilmette) writes:
>In article <868@tukki.jyu.fi> markku@jytko.jyu.fi (Markku Sakkinen) SAKKINEN@FINJYU.bitnet (alternative) writes:
>>In article <238@pink.ACA.MCC.COM> rfg@pink.aca.mcc.com.UUCP (Ron Guilmette) writes:
>>One example of these
>>is the widening of char values to int in many contexts: it even prevents us
>>from declaring an overloaded function pair corresponding to the _argument_
>>types char and int.
>
>Who sez?  I believe this is legal now.

Indeed it is.  See section 8.4.1, page 236 in Stroustrup.  There are
a few lines like
	
	istream& operator>>(char&);
	istream& operator>>(short&);
	istream& operator>>(int&);
	Scott Simpson
	TRW Space and Defense Sector
	oberon!trwarcadia!simpson  	(UUCP)
	trwarcadia!simpson@usc.edu	(Internet)