Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Anthony D. Baye <Sha### [at] spamnomorehotmailcom> wrote:
> > Though, I also don't recall my c++ instructor ever mentioning class-type
> > functors.  (I feel embarrassed now)
>
> structs and classes are the same thing in C++. Their only difference is
> the default visibility of members, when no visibility keyword is specified.
>
> --
>                                                           - Warp

I realize that. Classes are default private, structs are default public.

> > Still, it seems strange to me to bind a signal to a struct rather than to the
> > member function thereof.  After all, when the signal is raised/emitted, it is
> > the function that is called, not the containing object.
>
> You do understand what the idea with functors is?

apparently not.

When I learned about overloaded operators, I thought -- And it seems I was
wrong, or misheard -- that the parentheses were one of a few operators that it
didn't work with.  I had no idea they could even be overloaded.

The only mention of function objects in either of my textbooks was a brief
mention in relation to sorting, and an entry in a glossary.

*goes to look stuff up online.*

A.D.B.

Post a reply to this message