Peter Dimov wrote:
It's not that important, I was just curious. What's more important is that we don't seem to have a test case for the functionality. addressof_test is pretty basic.
Yes, that's an oversight on my part. I've attached a patch to addressof_test.cpp to test for taking the address of an array. I can confirm that these new tests pass with VC7.1 and gcc 3.3.3 (cygwin). -- Eric Niebler Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com Index: addressof_test.cpp =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/boost/boost/libs/utility/addressof_test.cpp,v retrieving revision 1.4 diff -b -d -u -r1.4 addressof_test.cpp --- addressof_test.cpp 3 Feb 2005 13:41:16 -0000 1.4 +++ addressof_test.cpp 14 Mar 2005 21:20:38 -0000 @@ -37,5 +37,13 @@ const volatile nonaddressable& cvx = *px; BOOST_CHECK(boost::addressof(cvx) == static_cast<const volatile nonaddressable*>(px)); + int nrg[3] = {1,2,3}; + int (*pnrg)[3] = &nrg; + BOOST_CHECK(boost::addressof(nrg) == pnrg); + + int const cnrg[3] = {1,2,3}; + int const (*pcnrg)[3] = &cnrg; + BOOST_CHECK(boost::addressof(cnrg) == pcnrg); + return 0; }