Re: Writing unsigned char to std::ostream
Giovanni Dicanio wrote:
"Ulrich Eckhardt" <eckhardt@satorlaser.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:uovsq4-e4j.ln1@satorlaser.homedns.org...
Never use C-style casts in C++, they only serve to hide broken code and
move
the error detection from compile-time to runtime.
Hi,
I think that we should prefer C++-style casts, as you wrote, but there are
(rare) cases when IMHO C-style casts could be OK, exspecially when working
with C APIs[...]
The only really valid case I have found is when casting a void pointer to a
function pointer type, e.g. in the context of GetProcAddress().
, e.g. consider the following code to add a string to
list-control (LVITEM needs a LPTSTR, and we have a CString as input):
http://www.codeproject.com/listctrl/listctrldemo.asp
<code>
LVITEM lvi;
CString strItem;
lvi.pszText = (LPTSTR)(LPCTSTR)(strItem);
</code>
What's the C++ version?
// Note: I'm not sure about the method name
lvi.pszText = strItem.GetBuffer();
Is the following correct: ?
lvi.pszText = const_cast< LPTSTR >( static_cast<LPCTSTR>(strItem) );
...a bit more verbose.
OK, but "the beauty is in the eye of the beholder" :)
I think you could have written 'const_cast<LPTSTR>(strItem.operator
LPCTSTR())'. Anyway, isn't there a CListBox class that gives a seamless
integration with CString? In such a class, I would even find it okay to use
a slightly more verbose syntax, as long as it works correctly and the
syntax for the (high-level) code built on it is improved.
This is not a black/white thing though, it's definitely an area that is
gray.
regards
Uli