Hi Andrew, > [...] > C++ doesn't have any stack, and it doesn't have any registers. By > thinking "under the hood" in this way you're confusing implementation > with langauge in an unhelpful way. All that matters is how the > language is *defined*. I suspect this unnecessary mixing of levels is > responsible for much of the confusion in this thread. Good point, I guess you're right. > [...] > The reason non-const references to non-lvalues is not allowed is > explained in Section 3.7 of "The Design and Evolution of C++". I'll have a look at that soon (when I have this book). Thanks, Christian > [...]
