Why enums can convert to IntPtr?

[Andrey Simanovsky]

Consider the following code snippet:

using System;
enum E { A, }
struct T
{
public static explicit operator T(int i) { return new T(); }
public static void Foo()
{
E e = 0;
IntPtr ptr = (IntPtr)e; // case 1: compiles fine
T t = (T)e; // case 2: gives an error in correspondence with the specs
}
}

Microsoft C# compiler gives an error in case 2 (which follows the specs). In
case 1 the code compiles fine.
Does the compiler follow the specs in case 1? If so, where is the
description of that case in the specs?

I used C# compiler from VS 2003 and 2.0 November preview.

Thanks,
andy

[Sylvain Lafontaine]

I don't know but maybe a boxing case here.

--
Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
MVP - Technologies Virtual-PC
E-mail: http://cerbermail.com/?QugbLEWINF
"Andrey Simanovsky" <An**************@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:49**********************************@microsof t.com...

Consider the following code snippet:

using System;
enum E { A, }
struct T
{
public static explicit operator T(int i) { return new T(); }
public static void Foo()
{
E e = 0;
IntPtr ptr = (IntPtr)e; // case 1: compiles fine
T t = (T)e; // case 2: gives an error in correspondence with the
specs
}
}

Microsoft C# compiler gives an error in case 2 (which follows the specs).
In
case 1 the code compiles fine.
Does the compiler follow the specs in case 1? If so, where is the
description of that case in the specs?

I used C# compiler from VS 2003 and 2.0 November preview.

Thanks,
andy

[cody]

Boxing can only occur with type "object" and nothing else.
"Sylvain Lafontaine" <sylvain aei ca (fill the blanks, no spam please)>
schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:e8**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

I don't know but maybe a boxing case here.

--
Sylvain Lafontaine, ing.
MVP - Technologies Virtual-PC
E-mail: http://cerbermail.com/?QugbLEWINF
"Andrey Simanovsky" <An**************@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in
message news:49**********************************@microsof t.com...

Consider the following code snippet:

using System;
enum E { A, }
struct T
{
public static explicit operator T(int i) { return new T(); }
public static void Foo()
{
E e = 0;
IntPtr ptr = (IntPtr)e; // case 1: compiles fine
T t = (T)e; // case 2: gives an error in correspondence with the
specs
}
}

Microsoft C# compiler gives an error in case 2 (which follows the specs).
In
case 1 the code compiles fine.
Does the compiler follow the specs in case 1? If so, where is the
description of that case in the specs?

I used C# compiler from VS 2003 and 2.0 November preview.

Thanks,
andy

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

cody <de********@gmx.de> wrote:

Boxing can only occur with type "object" and nothing else.

Not true - it also occurs with interfaces. For instance:

int x = 5;
IComparable ic = x; // Boxing here

I don't think that's what's going on here, but I thought it was worth
being precise :)

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Marcus Andren]

On Wed, 25 May 2005 09:41:06 -0700, Andrey Simanovsky wrote:

E e = 0;
IntPtr ptr = (IntPtr)e; // case 1: compiles fine Does the compiler follow the specs in case 1? If so, where is the
description of that case in the specs?

I looked in the spec and came to the conclusion that the compiler isn't
following the spec. The only way this could possibly work is by using the
explicit conversion operator.

public static explicit operator IntPtr(int value);

This however requires that we have two valid Standard Conversions. One from
IntPtr->IntPtr and one from E->int. The first is an identity conversion,
but the second seem to have neither an implicit or explicit standard
conversion as far as I can see.

--
Marcus Andrén

[Andrey Simanovsky]

Thanks Marcus,

I also think that the specs do not reflect the compiler behavior. Just
wanted to make sure that I do not misread them.

"Marcus Andren" wrote:

On Wed, 25 May 2005 09:41:06 -0700, Andrey Simanovsky wrote:

E e = 0;
IntPtr ptr = (IntPtr)e; // case 1: compiles fine

Does the compiler follow the specs in case 1? If so, where is the
description of that case in the specs?

I looked in the spec and came to the conclusion that the compiler isn't
following the spec. The only way this could possibly work is by using the
explicit conversion operator.

public static explicit operator IntPtr(int value);

This however requires that we have two valid Standard Conversions. One from
IntPtr->IntPtr and one from E->int. The first is an identity conversion,
but the second seem to have neither an implicit or explicit standard
conversion as far as I can see.

--
Marcus Andrén