Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!dlogics!dsa
From: dsa@dlogics.COM (David Angulo)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Resolving an Overloaded Function Call
Summary: evaluate:  (int == char)
Keywords: overloading
Message-ID: <585@dlogics.COM>
Date: 8 May 90 00:26:54 GMT
References: <35925@think.Think.COM> <2619@ektools.UUCP>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Datalogics Inc., Chicago
Lines: 38

In article <2619@ektools.UUCP>, randolph@ektools.UUCP (Gary L. Randolph) writes:
> 
>           In C++, the type of a literal character constant is char; in C
>           it is int.
>      He goes on to state the purpose for this is to overload on char.
> 
> 
> #expression 'a' is 'int' not char so I don't see how this could be an
> #exact match. Is C++ different from C in this regard?
>                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Yes.

Did this change in 2.0?  I had a problem recently because I had defined a
class something like this:

class a
  {
  a (int);
  a (char*);
  };

When I used it, I had forgotton which constructors I had defined, so I
coded:

char a_char;
a an_a (a_char);

When I finally tracked it down, I realized that it was using the "int"
constructor.  I thought "Well, you would think that it would at least give
you a warning," and proceeded to make the "char" constructor as well.
I was really flabbergasted to see the ERROR message "cannot distinguish a
char from an int."  This was in 1.2 so has this changed in 2.0?  Your
Lippman reference says specifically that you CAN overload by an argument
of type char.
-- 
David S. Angulo                  (312) 266-3134
Datalogics                       Internet: dsa@dlogics.com
441 W. Huron                     UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!dsa
Chicago, Il. 60610               FAX: (312) 266-4473