Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
"John Torjo" <john.lists@torjo.com> wrote in message news:4152776F.8040303@torjo.com...
inline formatob_t & format( format_type s) { FormatObject::format( s ); return( *this ); }
formatob( vec ).format( " + " )
has the same type as
formatob( vec )
What are you talking about? Why would you bother what
FormatObject::format
is returning?
So that you can manipulate the formatob() object multiple times, like: formatob().do_this().do_that().and_that_too();
[I don't know why you removed original code. Let see it again.]
You must be joking. Do you think I can't read code?? formatob().format() return *** *this **** NOT FormatObject::format();
So my question still stand.
sorry - I misread your question. Yes, your question stands. Best, John -- John Torjo -- john@torjo.com Contributing editor, C/C++ Users Journal -- "Win32 GUI Generics" -- generics & GUI do mix, after all -- http://www.torjo.com/win32gui/ -- v1.4 - save_dlg - true binding of your data to UI controls! + easily add validation rules (win32gui/examples/smart_dlg)