
21 Dec
2005
21 Dec
'05
1:20 a.m.
"Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> writes: | Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > "Eric Niebler" <eric@boost-consulting.com> writes: | > | > | Now look above it: "typedef foo const cfoo". So the type of the 3rd | > | operand is "rvalue of foo const". The 2nd operand gets converted to | > ^^^^^^^^^ | > | > [there is no type "rvalue of ..." as you said earlier] | > | | Thanks for the correction. So, the above would be more properly stated, | "the 3rd operand is an rvalue of type foo const," is that right? Yup.