Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. function overload problem:(char) and (char*)

function overload problem:(char) and (char*)

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
helptutorialquestion
21 Posts 10 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • A Aamir Butt

    Come on guys. We have got a programming question in the LOUNGE. Hoping to see some of the best from you people :) "Aerodynamically, the bumble bee shouldn't be able to fly, but the bumble bee doesn't know it so it goes on flying anyway." - Mary Kay Ash My Articles

    J Offline
    J Offline
    jan larsen
    wrote on last edited by
    #5

    Aw, it WAS my best... :rolleyes: "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • J jan larsen

      By the way, the answer is pretty simple, ask in the right forum, Visual C++, and you will get it :-) "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

      C Offline
      C Offline
      CP Visitor
      wrote on last edited by
      #6

      jan larsen wrote: For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " This not correct English, no?

      J 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • B bobi_zcl

        Hi,everyone: I write two function: void fun(char) and void fun(char*).when I call fun(0),the compiler display message"ambiguous call to overloaded function";but,I call fun(1),the compiler call fun(char). Anyone can tell me how to explain it? your friend:bobi

        D Offline
        D Offline
        Daniel Turini
        wrote on last edited by
        #7

        Did you try calling fun(0*)? It's obvious that you're passing a single char (the zero) to the function, so the compiler will call the fun(char) overload. Just put an asterisk and everything should work. Ok, I reckon, this is horrible, but it's not worse than "the compiler is having fun()" I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!

        J A B 3 Replies Last reply
        0
        • J jan larsen

          By the way, the answer is pretty simple, ask in the right forum, Visual C++, and you will get it :-) "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

          B Offline
          B Offline
          bobi_zcl
          wrote on last edited by
          #8

          I still havn't understand what you said,Can you explain? your friend:bobi

          J 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • C CP Visitor

            jan larsen wrote: For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " This not correct English, no?

            J Offline
            J Offline
            jan larsen
            wrote on last edited by
            #9

            What did you expect from VB programmers :-) "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • D Daniel Turini

              Did you try calling fun(0*)? It's obvious that you're passing a single char (the zero) to the function, so the compiler will call the fun(char) overload. Just put an asterisk and everything should work. Ok, I reckon, this is horrible, but it's not worse than "the compiler is having fun()" I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!

              J Offline
              J Offline
              jan larsen
              wrote on last edited by
              #10

              Daniel Turini wrote: Did you try calling fun(0*)? Oh that one's obvious, as long as he remember to add the compiler hint at the end of the code like this:

              int main()
              {
              fun(0*);
              }
              *: It's (char) 0, not (void *) 0, now go on...

              "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • D Daniel Turini

                Did you try calling fun(0*)? It's obvious that you're passing a single char (the zero) to the function, so the compiler will call the fun(char) overload. Just put an asterisk and everything should work. Ok, I reckon, this is horrible, but it's not worse than "the compiler is having fun()" I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!

                B Offline
                B Offline
                bobi_zcl
                wrote on last edited by
                #11

                I call fun(0),the compiler display message "ambiguous call...",when I call fun(1)(passing a value which is not zero),the compiler call fun(char),why?? your friend:bobi

                V J 2 Replies Last reply
                0
                • D Daniel Turini

                  Did you try calling fun(0*)? It's obvious that you're passing a single char (the zero) to the function, so the compiler will call the fun(char) overload. Just put an asterisk and everything should work. Ok, I reckon, this is horrible, but it's not worse than "the compiler is having fun()" I see dead pixels Yes, even I am blogging now!

                  A Offline
                  A Offline
                  Aamir Butt
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #12

                  what about fun(*0). This will lead to the first address in memory and then will have some fun with it :) "Aerodynamically, the bumble bee shouldn't be able to fly, but the bumble bee doesn't know it so it goes on flying anyway." - Mary Kay Ash My Articles

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • B bobi_zcl

                    I still havn't understand what you said,Can you explain? your friend:bobi

                    J Offline
                    J Offline
                    jan larsen
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #13

                    It was a joke, programming questions are to be posted in the programming fora. This is the lounge, people asking programming questions in the lounge will be put in the comfy chair. I will probably regret this, but here is the real answer: When you pass the literal 0 to your function, the compiler will have no way of knowing if it is (char) 0 or (char *) 0. You will have to explicitly type cast it. In the Visual C++ forum you would have had the opportunity to get a better answer from eg. Christian Graus involving standard C++ type casts, I can only offer C style casts :-) : fun((char *) 0) or fun((char) 0). "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

                    K P B 3 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • B bobi_zcl

                      I call fun(0),the compiler display message "ambiguous call...",when I call fun(1)(passing a value which is not zero),the compiler call fun(char),why?? your friend:bobi

                      V Offline
                      V Offline
                      V 0
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #14

                      on top of this page on the right you see "Message Boards", if you click on that you will get: OR a dropdown menu OR it's a link If you get the dropdownmenu click on the Visual C++ and you will be taken to the C++ forum, else you will get a bunch of links including Visual C++, which will also take you to the C++ forum. When you get there (the Visual C++ forum) kindly ask your question again and it will probably be answered without jokes. good luck. No hurries, no worries.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • B bobi_zcl

                        I call fun(0),the compiler display message "ambiguous call...",when I call fun(1)(passing a value which is not zero),the compiler call fun(char),why?? your friend:bobi

                        J Offline
                        J Offline
                        Jorgen Sigvardsson
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #15

                        Because 0 is a valid pointer constant in C++, 1 isn't. Since 1 isn't a valid pointer constant, the compiler will ignore any funs with taking pointers as argument. Anyway, NO PROGRAMMING QUESTIONS IN THE LOUNGE! Next time, we'll demand your first born. -- My name in Katakana is ヨルゲン. My name in German is Jörgen. My name in Mandarin/Kanji is 乔尔根 西格瓦德森. My name in Korean is 요르겐. I blog too now[^]

                        L 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • J Jorgen Sigvardsson

                          Because 0 is a valid pointer constant in C++, 1 isn't. Since 1 isn't a valid pointer constant, the compiler will ignore any funs with taking pointers as argument. Anyway, NO PROGRAMMING QUESTIONS IN THE LOUNGE! Next time, we'll demand your first born. -- My name in Katakana is ヨルゲン. My name in German is Jörgen. My name in Mandarin/Kanji is 乔尔根 西格瓦德森. My name in Korean is 요르겐. I blog too now[^]

                          L Offline
                          L Offline
                          leppie
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #16

                          Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Next time, we'll demand your first born. Your really want that? :p xacc-ide 0.0.15 now with C#, MSIL, C, XML, ASP.NET, Nemerle, MyXaml and HLSL coloring - Screenshots

                          J K 2 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • J jan larsen

                            It was a joke, programming questions are to be posted in the programming fora. This is the lounge, people asking programming questions in the lounge will be put in the comfy chair. I will probably regret this, but here is the real answer: When you pass the literal 0 to your function, the compiler will have no way of knowing if it is (char) 0 or (char *) 0. You will have to explicitly type cast it. In the Visual C++ forum you would have had the opportunity to get a better answer from eg. Christian Graus involving standard C++ type casts, I can only offer C style casts :-) : fun((char *) 0) or fun((char) 0). "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

                            K Offline
                            K Offline
                            KaRl
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #17

                            jan larsen wrote: I will probably regret this, but here is the real answer: Shame on you! You can't stop yourself to help people, can you, you bloody socialist evildoer :-D


                            Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links!

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • L leppie

                              Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Next time, we'll demand your first born. Your really want that? :p xacc-ide 0.0.15 now with C#, MSIL, C, XML, ASP.NET, Nemerle, MyXaml and HLSL coloring - Screenshots

                              J Offline
                              J Offline
                              Jorgen Sigvardsson
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #18

                              No, but he will probably want his first born more than I do. That's sort of the point. ;P -- My name in Katakana is ヨルゲン. My name in German is Jörgen. My name in Mandarin/Kanji is 乔尔根 西格瓦德森. My name in Korean is 요르겐. I blog too now[^]

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • L leppie

                                Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Next time, we'll demand your first born. Your really want that? :p xacc-ide 0.0.15 now with C#, MSIL, C, XML, ASP.NET, Nemerle, MyXaml and HLSL coloring - Screenshots

                                K Offline
                                K Offline
                                KaRl
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #19

                                Please don't ask![^] :-D


                                Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck, doch Seh' ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links!

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • J jan larsen

                                  It was a joke, programming questions are to be posted in the programming fora. This is the lounge, people asking programming questions in the lounge will be put in the comfy chair. I will probably regret this, but here is the real answer: When you pass the literal 0 to your function, the compiler will have no way of knowing if it is (char) 0 or (char *) 0. You will have to explicitly type cast it. In the Visual C++ forum you would have had the opportunity to get a better answer from eg. Christian Graus involving standard C++ type casts, I can only offer C style casts :-) : fun((char *) 0) or fun((char) 0). "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

                                  P Offline
                                  P Offline
                                  peterchen
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #20

                                  sorry, nothing personal. :rolleyes:


                                  Pandoras Gift #44: Hope. The one that keeps you on suffering.
                                  aber.. "Wie gesagt, der Scheiss is' Therapie"
                                  boost your code || Fold With Us! || sighist | doxygen

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • J jan larsen

                                    It was a joke, programming questions are to be posted in the programming fora. This is the lounge, people asking programming questions in the lounge will be put in the comfy chair. I will probably regret this, but here is the real answer: When you pass the literal 0 to your function, the compiler will have no way of knowing if it is (char) 0 or (char *) 0. You will have to explicitly type cast it. In the Visual C++ forum you would have had the opportunity to get a better answer from eg. Christian Graus involving standard C++ type casts, I can only offer C style casts :-) : fun((char *) 0) or fun((char) 0). "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus

                                    B Offline
                                    B Offline
                                    bobi_zcl
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #21

                                    I can understand.but I define another two:fun(int) and fun(int*),then I call fun(0),the compiler will compile successfully, and fun(0) will select fun(int) instead of fun(int*).why? thank your suggestion,I will go to the visual C++ forum. your friend:bobi

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    Reply
                                    • Reply as topic
                                    Log in to reply
                                    • Oldest to Newest
                                    • Newest to Oldest
                                    • Most Votes


                                    • Login

                                    • Don't have an account? Register

                                    • Login or register to search.
                                    • First post
                                      Last post
                                    0
                                    • Categories
                                    • Recent
                                    • Tags
                                    • Popular
                                    • World
                                    • Users
                                    • Groups