"Bernhard R. Link" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | * Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [061108 16:15]: | > This assumes, of course, that we can build an equivalence set for | > types. I think that we need to make that work in the middle-end, and | > force the front-ends to conform. As someone else mentioned, there are | > horrific cases in C like a[] being compatible with both a[5] and a[10] | > but a[5] and a[10] not being compatible with each other, and similarly | > f() is compatible with f(int) and f(float) but the latter two are not | > compatible with each other. | | Isn't void* and anyothertype* the same case? | And how are classes and parent classes made compatible in C++?
For C++, in computing the canonical type, you typicall don't use "compatible." You ultimately use the quintescence of the ODR. void* is a type different from "anyothertype*". Similarly, a class is different from its base classes. | Is the | front end always making a implicit type conversion or are they 'equivalent' | in one direction? There is no implicit conversion. -- Gaby
