code portability and function call serialisation.
 

Hello.

I recently discovered that this kind of code :

| struct Object
| {
| string f() { return string("Toto"); }
| }
|
| int main( ... )
| {
| Object o;
|
| cout << o.f().c_str() << endl;
|
| return 0;
| }

Is working fine with SUN's C++ compilers and Visual C++ 6 (compiler)
but not fine at all with AIX ones.

What is the status of this kind of code ( o.f().g().h().j() )

a) Is this part of the C++ standard ?

b) Is this only a features that is supposed by the standard to be
compiler dependent ?

c) Is this an AIX compiler bug ?

I would say the answer is the b) one, but i'm not sure.

What is your point of view about this ?

Regards.

Benoit Lefevre.

Re: code portability and function call serialisation.
 

"Lefevre" <benoit.lefevre@reuters.com> wrote...
> Hello.
>
> I recently discovered that this kind of code :
>
> | struct Object
> | {
> | string f() { return string("Toto"); }

'string' is undefined. Did you forget to include a header,
maybe?

> | }

Missing ; here.

> |
> | int main( ... )

There is no allowed declaration of 'main' that would accept
any number and types of arguments. It's either (void) or
(int, char*[]).

> | {
> | Object o;
> |
> | cout << o.f().c_str() << endl;
> |
> | return 0;
> | }
>
> Is working fine with SUN's C++ compilers and Visual C++ 6 (compiler)
> but not fine at all with AIX ones.
>
> What is the status of this kind of code ( o.f().g().h().j() )
>
> a) Is this part of the C++ standard ?

Pretty much. If a member function returns an object (or a reference
to an object), another member function can be called using operator.
(operator "dot").

>
> b) Is this only a features that is supposed by the standard to be
> compiler dependent ?

Nope. BTW, they have been in the language since the beginning, I
believe.

>
> c) Is this an AIX compiler bug ?

Your code is not compilable. Post the real code, post the compiler
diagnostic messages you're getting, then we could try to determine
whether it's a compiler's fault.

>
> I would say the answer is the b) one, but i'm not sure.

I would say you need to study C++ a bit more.

>
> What is your point of view about this ?

My point of view is that you need to post real code, not something
you just remembered and typed in with tons of errors into a message.

Victor