Menu
I'm writing a class that, assuming the answer to Are enumeration types layout compatible with their underlying type? is "yes", is layout-compatible struct kevent but uses enum classes for filter, flags, etc. with the proper underlying types for the relevant fields. It is also standard-layout (the fields are all private and all themselves standard layout, there are no virtual members, there are no base classes). From my reading of n3690, I can determine that my class and struct kevent have the same value representation, but I can't see anything in the standard that therefore allows me to reinterpret_cast between them, even though that seems like the reasonable interpretation of "value representation". Is this technically allowed by the standard? If not, what does knowing the value representation of a type give you?
EDIT 2014/02/24 16:45 EST: In response to a comment, I should clarify that I want to reinterpret_cast the first class to a reference to the second, as of course you can't directly reinterpret_cast a non-pointer type to another non-pointer type.
645
reinterpret_cast is a type of casting operator used in C++. It is used to convert a pointer of some data type into a pointer of another data type, even if the data types before and after conversion are different. It does not check if the pointer type and data pointed by the pointer is same or not.
It is purely a compile-time directive which instructs the compiler to treat expression as if it had the type new-type. Only the following conversions can be done with reinterpret_cast, except when such conversions would cast away constness or volatility.
but I can't see anything in the standard that therefore allows me to
reinterpret_castbetween them, even though that seems like the reasonable interpretation of "value representation". Is this technically allowed by the standard?
No. The standard is clear (see [basic.lval] p10) about which types can be aliased, and layout-compatible types are not included.
If not, what does knowing the value representation of a type give you?
If the types are both trivially copyable and have the same value representation then you could memcpy from an object of one type to an object of the other type, and vice versa. If they're not trivially copyable then it doesn't give you much at all.
AFAICT the standard doesn't actually say what can and can't be done with layout-compatible types.
158
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With
