Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


#ActualOberon_Command

Posted 30 December 2012 - 03:52 PM

Also, you can't do that with primitive types.

You could always write a "boxed type" template class that encapsulates a primitive type, while supporting the same operators the primitive type does. So, essentially reinventing Java's "boxed types" in C++ using templates. I'm not in a position to say whether that would be worth the effort, though. My guess would be that it isn't.

#1Oberon_Command

Posted 30 December 2012 - 03:51 PM

Also, you can't do that with primitive types.

You could always write a "boxed type" template class that encapsulates a primitive type, while supporting the same operators the primitive type does. So, essentially reinventing Java's "boxed types." I'm not in a position to say whether that would be worth the effort, though. My guess would be that it isn't.

PARTNERS