Ironclad C++

[Walter Bright]

On 8/3/2013 7:08 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 08/04/2013 04:06 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 8/3/2013 5:49 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>> On 08/04/2013 01:55 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> On 8/3/2013 4:32 PM, bearophile wrote:
>>>>> The paper explains the various cases: assign from ptr<T> into lptr<T>,
>>>>> assign
>>>>> from lptr<T> into ptr<T>, and assign from lptr<T> into lptr<T>.
>>>>>
>>>>> So with a mix of run-time tests and a small amount of static analysis
>>>>> the code
>>>>> is safe and fast enough. It seems a simple enough idea.
>>>>
>>>> The problem with different pointer types is, of course, what do you do
>>>> with functions that take pointers as arguments?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why would that be a problem?
>>
>> Consider the canonical example:
>>
>>      void* foo(void *p) { return p; }
>>
>> Do you write an overload for each kind of pointer?
>
> No, you use lptr<void> because it is the most specialized type that works.

Then the pointer coming out is more specialized than the pointer that went in?