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.
  • 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