Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!uunet!microsoft!jimad
From: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Distinguishing lvalue/rvalue operator[]
Message-ID: <71135@microsoft.UUCP>
Date: 7 Mar 91 21:34:54 GMT
References: <1991Mar3.202134.17812@mathcs.sjsu.edu> <1991Mar4.054915.19566@mathcs.sjsu.edu> <1991Mar5.021423.22117@world.std.com>
Reply-To: jimad@microsoft.UUCP (Jim ADCOCK)
Organization: Microsoft Corp., Redmond WA
Lines: 12

In article <1991Mar5.021423.22117@world.std.com> wmm@world.std.com (William M Miller) writes:
|That means that
|anything you want to do with the accessed array member, you must be able to
|do with an object of class Access.  If you want to use ++, you need an
|Access::operator++().  If you want to do ".print()," as in your earlier
|posting, you need an Access::print().  

This logic would imply that when implementing a smart pointer class,
one should also be forced to implement SmartPointer::print().  Fortunately,
in C++ today, people implementing smart pointers are not forced to do so.  
I suggest that people implementing smart reference classes should also not 
be forced to do so.