Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!samsung!uunet!microsoft!jimad
From: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Smarter pointers - another solution
Message-ID: <70225@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 25 Jan 91 19:26:56 GMT
References: <3454@lupine.NCD.COM> <3.UUL1.3#8618@softrue.UUCP>
Reply-To: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 15

In article <3.UUL1.3#8618@softrue.UUCP> kearns@softrue.UUCP (Steven Kearns) writes:
|I am sure this must have been mentioned before, but I cannot
|recollect the discussion, if there is one...
|
|What is wrong with allowing one to define
|"class T* {.....}"
|which defines a new class that replaces the usual type (T *)?

Interesting idea.  How should a class T** work then?  As a (class T)**
or as a (class T*)* ?

Also, it would seem that the legal coercions of a (class T*)* would be
different from that of (class T)**

Still, I think this idea is worth thinking about.