Peter Dimov wrote:
(A reinterpret_cast<char*>( p ) is indirectly required to work when p is a pointer to a class type, but it's possible in theory for a sufficiently mischievous compiler to break it for long*. I know of no such compiler, present or future, of course.)
Is reinterpret_cast<char*>( pointer-to-a-class-type ) the only case when reinterpret_cast is required to work? Is it required to work in this case: array of a scalar-type to a pointer-to-scalar-type ? extern char cpp_signature_tag[]; ... reinterpret_cast<const char*>(detail::cpp_signature_tag) Just trying to understand when it is safe to use reinterpret_cast. Thanks, Boris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Dimov" <pdimov@pdimov.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 7:03 PM Subject: Re: [boost] [serialization] patch for portable_binary_oarchive.hpp
Boris Gubenko:
I think the correct change to silence the type conversion error is
char * first = static_cast<char *>(static_cast<void *>(const_cast<long*>(& l)));
I'm not sure my change is incorrect. In terms of style, I think that your change is better.
Dave's insistence that we have to obfuscate our reinterpret_casts is well known and a very strict reading of the standard is on his side _in this specific case_, but I personally don't find his style better at all.
(A reinterpret_cast<char*>( p ) is indirectly required to work when p is a pointer to a class type, but it's possible in theory for a sufficiently mischievous compiler to break it for long*. I know of no such compiler, present or future, of course.)
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost