Am 13.05.2011 07:44, schrieb Tobi:
> 8.5/9 of the C++ standard says
>
> "If no initializer is specified for an object, and the object is of
> (possibly cv-qualified) nonPOD class type (or array thereof), the object
> shall be default-initialized; if the object is of const-qualified type,
> the underlying class type shall have a user-declared default constructor.
Interestingly irritating... Since I don't have an GCC4.6 at hand, I
*think* the source of the problem might be that cCursesFont has just an
default constructor. So it should also work if you add an empty
constructor cCursesFont::cCursesFont() { } ???
I thought such an empty constructor would always behave the same as the
default constructor...
Does anyone know the background why the standard doesn't just use the
default constructor for const objects?
Cheers,
Udo
_______________________________________________
vdr mailing list
vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
