Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!shadooby!accuvax.nwu.edu!tank!ncar!unmvax!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!rutgers!att!westmark!mole-end!mat
From: mat@mole-end.UUCP (Mark A Terribile)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Are  ::*  .*  and  ->*  healthy in 2.0 ?
Keywords: ::*
Message-ID: <189@mole-end.UUCP>
Date: 13 May 89 23:38:23 GMT
Organization: mole-end--private system.  admin: mole-end!newtnews
Lines: 37

Would someone in the know tell me if pointer-to-member will be really
healthy in 2.0 ?  I've run into a family of bugs in 1.2.1 on the Sun and
Glockenspiel's 1.1 for MS-DOS including

	Failure to insert the virtualization code in inline'd code that
	uses call by pointer-to-member-function.

	Failure to properly cast the pointer-to-function found in the
	vtbl (no inline expansion) when making the call when the vtbl
	case must be checked.

	Failure to properly write the dereference in the second case.


The functions involved were output functions of the general form

	virtual ostream& X::put( ostream& );

and

	ostream& Y::put( ostream& );

where Y is derived from X.

The inline that failed was written

	ostream& X_io::operator()( ostream& o )
				{ return X_pointer->*put_mem_p( o ); };

In the place where the compiler gave up, the inline was itself called out
of an inline (a friend):

	ostream& operator<<( ostream& o, X_io& x ) { return x( o ); };
-- 

 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile