Hi Kai,
On Oct 29, 7:46*pm, Kai-Uwe Bux <jkherci...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Just one remark not relating to initialization: the line
>
> * Foo foo();
>
> does not define a Foo object named foo, but declares a function foo()
> without arguments and return type Foo.
Yes of course, I knew that :*).
>
> And another remark about value initialization and default initialization: in
> the case of the given class, I think, there is no observable difference. For
> objects of class type with a user-declared default constructor, value
> initialization just calls the default constructor (which has to be
> accessible).
I believe that value & default initializations are slightly different,
see:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp....4a1bb3d44a8690.
Does everything else seem correct?
Taras