473,325 Members | 2,608 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,325 software developers and data experts.

How do I expose a static_cast?

Hi,

In the following code I get the compiler error:

error C2243: 'static_cast' : conversion from 'class B *' to 'class A *'
exists, but is inaccessible

I understand why I get this error and can usually get around the situation
by inserting a "using A::..." statement inside class B, however, due to this
being a static cast, what is the syntax?

--------

class A
{
};

class B : private A
{
};

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
B* b;
A* a;

a = static_cast<A*>(b);

return 0;
}

Thanks,
David
Jul 22 '05 #1
9 4141
news.ir.com.au wrote:
Hi,

In the following code I get the compiler error:

error C2243: 'static_cast' : conversion from 'class B *' to 'class A
*' exists, but is inaccessible

I understand why I get this error and can usually get around the
situation by inserting a "using A::..." statement inside class B,
however, due to this being a static cast, what is the syntax?
The syntax for what?
The A part of B objects is private, i.e. inaccessible to the outside
world. Therefore, you cannot convert a B pointer into an A pointer. I'm
not sure if you meant that by "I understand why I get this error".
Anyway, I don't understand what your question now is.
class A
{
};

class B : private A
{
};

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
B* b;
A* a;

a = static_cast<A*>(b);

return 0;
}

Thanks,
David


Jul 22 '05 #2
Rolf,

Thanks for your reply.

What I meant is, I can understand that I get this error due to class A being
unaccessible to class B. However it is possible to explictely allow members
the be accessed with the "using" keyword.

Eg. If I was to add the method A::Test(), it is now possible to access
A::Test() inside class B by adding the following statement to class B:

using A::Test();

My question is, since the above can be done, is it possible to do the same
for static_cast?

I've tried the obvious of:

using A::static_cast;

and other variations such as:

using A::operator static_cast;
using A::operator static_cast<>;
..
..
..

Please let me know if you still do not understand.

Thanks,

David
"Rolf Magnus" <ra******@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:c2*************@news.t-online.com...
news.ir.com.au wrote:
Hi,

In the following code I get the compiler error:

error C2243: 'static_cast' : conversion from 'class B *' to 'class A
*' exists, but is inaccessible

I understand why I get this error and can usually get around the
situation by inserting a "using A::..." statement inside class B,
however, due to this being a static cast, what is the syntax?


The syntax for what?
The A part of B objects is private, i.e. inaccessible to the outside
world. Therefore, you cannot convert a B pointer into an A pointer. I'm
not sure if you meant that by "I understand why I get this error".
Anyway, I don't understand what your question now is.
class A
{
};

class B : private A
{
};

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
B* b;
A* a;

a = static_cast<A*>(b);

return 0;
}

Thanks,
David

Jul 22 '05 #3
news.ir.com.au wrote:
...
Eg. If I was to add the method A::Test(), it is now possible to access
A::Test() inside class B by adding the following statement to class B:

using A::Test();

My question is, since the above can be done, is it possible to do the same
for static_cast?


Formal answer - no.

But if you really want 'B*' to be convertible to 'A*' maybe you should
just make 'A' _public_ base class of 'B'. Although, come to think about
it, public inheritance usually implies a lot more than a mere pointer
convertibility...

You can also use "brute force" to break through private inheritance by
using C-style cast

B* b;
A* a;
...
a = (A*) b;

This will work. But this is as ugly as it ever gets.

Maybe more elegant solution would be to introduce a member function into
class 'B', which will return a pointer to its 'A' base

class B : private A {
...
public:
A* get_A() { return this; }
};

Anyway, it would be useful if you could explain in more detail why
exactly you need this type of functionality.

(And would you please stop top-posting?)

--
Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich

Jul 22 '05 #4
In article <nL*****************@news.optus.net.au>,
"news.ir.com.au" <da*******@yahoo.com> wrote:
Rolf,

Thanks for your reply.

What I meant is, I can understand that I get this error due to class A being
unaccessible to class B. However it is possible to explictely allow members
the be accessed with the "using" keyword.

Eg. If I was to add the method A::Test(), it is now possible to access
A::Test() inside class B by adding the following statement to class B:

using A::Test();

My question is, since the above can be done, is it possible to do the same
for static_cast?


No. The closest you could do would be to add some function to B, like
the following:
A *B::GetAPointer()
{
return this;
}

Jul 22 '05 #5
> What I meant is, I can understand that I get this error due to
class A being unaccessible to class B. However it is possible to
explictely allow members the be accessed with the "using"
keyword.


static_cast is not a member of A or B though. There's nothing to
use.

Might this work?

class B : private A
{
public:
operator A&() { return *this; }
};
?

I'm not really sure why you'd want to do this though.
Alternatively you could make A publically inherited (since you
seem to want it to be anyway), or you could make A a sub-object
of B (that is, B has-a A) and then offer a GetA() method... This
seems like an odd request without knowing more context.

-tom!
Jul 22 '05 #6

"Andrey Tarasevich" <an**************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@news.supernews.com...
| news.ir.com.au wrote:
| > ...
| > Eg. If I was to add the method A::Test(), it is now possible to access
| > A::Test() inside class B by adding the following statement to class B:
| >
| > using A::Test();
| >
| > My question is, since the above can be done, is it possible to do the same
| > for static_cast?
|
| Formal answer - no.
|
| But if you really want 'B*' to be convertible to 'A*' maybe you should
| just make 'A' _public_ base class of 'B'. Although, come to think about
| it, public inheritance usually implies a lot more than a mere pointer
| convertibility...
|
| You can also use "brute force" to break through private inheritance by
| using C-style cast
|
| B* b;
| A* a;
| ...
| a = (A*) b;
|
| This will work. But this is as ugly as it ever gets.

This might be even more ugly, but at least we can spot it :-):
a = reinterpret_cast<A*>( b );

| Maybe more elegant solution would be to introduce a member function into
| class 'B', which will return a pointer to its 'A' base
|
| class B : private A {
| ...
| public:
| A* get_A() { return this; }
| };
|
| Anyway, it would be useful if you could explain in more detail why
| exactly you need this type of functionality.

I prefer this, given the two options.

Cheers.
Chris Val
Jul 22 '05 #7
Chris ( Val ) wrote in
news:c2*************@ID-110726.news.uni-berlin.de:

"Andrey Tarasevich" <an**************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:10*************@news.supernews.com...
| news.ir.com.au wrote:
| > ...
| > Eg. If I was to add the method A::Test(), it is now possible to
| > access A::Test() inside class B by adding the following statement
| > to class B:
| >
| > using A::Test();
| >
| > My question is, since the above can be done, is it possible to do
| > the same for static_cast?
|
| Formal answer - no.
|
| But if you really want 'B*' to be convertible to 'A*' maybe you
| should just make 'A' _public_ base class of 'B'. Although, come to
| think about it, public inheritance usually implies a lot more than a
| mere pointer convertibility...
|
| You can also use "brute force" to break through private inheritance
| by using C-style cast
|
| B* b;
| A* a;
| ...
| a = (A*) b;
|
| This will work. But this is as ugly as it ever gets.

This might be even more ugly, but at least we can spot it :-):
a = reinterpret_cast<A*>( b );


This is one of the things that C-style casts do that can't be
done by the other cast's. You're reinterpret_cast<> will only
work if the A subobject in B is at offset 0. The C-style cast
will work regardless.

Rob.
--
http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/
Jul 22 '05 #8

"Rob Williscroft" <rt*@freenet.REMOVE.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xn**********************************@195.129. 110.204...
| Chris ( Val ) wrote in
| news:c2*************@ID-110726.news.uni-berlin.de:
|
| >
| > "Andrey Tarasevich" <an**************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
| > news:10*************@news.supernews.com...
| >| news.ir.com.au wrote:
| >| > ...
| >| > Eg. If I was to add the method A::Test(), it is now possible to
| >| > access A::Test() inside class B by adding the following statement
| >| > to class B:
| >| >
| >| > using A::Test();
| >| >
| >| > My question is, since the above can be done, is it possible to do
| >| > the same for static_cast?
| >|
| >| Formal answer - no.
| >|
| >| But if you really want 'B*' to be convertible to 'A*' maybe you
| >| should just make 'A' _public_ base class of 'B'. Although, come to
| >| think about it, public inheritance usually implies a lot more than a
| >| mere pointer convertibility...
| >|
| >| You can also use "brute force" to break through private inheritance
| >| by using C-style cast
| >|
| >| B* b;
| >| A* a;
| >| ...
| >| a = (A*) b;
| >|
| >| This will work. But this is as ugly as it ever gets.
| >
| > This might be even more ugly, but at least we can spot it :-):
| > a = reinterpret_cast<A*>( b );
| >
|
| This is one of the things that C-style casts do that can't be
| done by the other cast's. You're reinterpret_cast<> will only
| work if the A subobject in B is at offset 0. The C-style cast
| will work regardless.

Yes, you're right, in that the c-style cast is much more
powerful in this regard.

Thanks.
Chris Val
Jul 22 '05 #9
Chris ( Val ) wrote:
|
| You can also use "brute force" to break through private inheritance by
| using C-style cast
|
| B* b;
| A* a;
| ...
| a = (A*) b;
|
| This will work. But this is as ugly as it ever gets.

This might be even more ugly, but at least we can spot it :-):
a = reinterpret_cast<A*>( b );
...


Yes, but this is not the same. The behavior of C-style cast in this case
is unambiguously defined by the language specification. And it performs
a correct derived-to-base conversion (ignoring any limitations imposed
by private inheritance).

On the contrary, the result of 'reinterpret_cast' is implementation-defined.

--
Best regards,
Andrey Tarasevich

Jul 22 '05 #10

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

7
by: Gary Labowitz | last post by:
Am I doing this correctly? It is a sample program for my class. #include <iostream> using namespace std; int main( ) { int x=3, y=4;
11
by: Scott Brady Drummonds | last post by:
Hi, everyone, I've checked a couple of on-line resources and am unable to determine how reinterpret_cast<> is different from static_cast<>. They both seem to perform a compile-time casting of...
26
by: Steven T. Hatton | last post by:
The code shown below is an example from the Coin3D documentation. I believe the use of the C-style cast is safe under the circumstances, but from what I've been exposed to (TC++PL(SE)), I would...
3
by: shrishjain | last post by:
Hi All, Do people frequently use static_cast, const_cast etc in industry?.. I only saw them in books, and never in real code.. Shrish
2
by: Amit | last post by:
Greetings. I am having some problem while using a cast operation(static_cast and/or dynamic_cast) between base and derived objects when passing to functions. what I have is something like this.. ...
19
by: PengYu.UT | last post by:
I see some code use static_cast<some_pointer_type>(0) instead of NULL to describe null pointer. I'm wondering what is the pros and cons of each way. Is there any reason why we should one verses the...
24
by: Rahul | last post by:
Hi, I have a class A : public B {...member functions......data members}; and am doing the following A *p=new A(); void *p=static_cast<void *>(p); factory_instance->process(p);
5
by: jason.cipriani | last post by:
There have been some recent threads about casting pointers to and from void* that have me rethinking some of my usual practices. I have a couple of questions. 1. What is the purpose of C++'s...
3
by: Rahul | last post by:
Hi, Everywhere I read that static_cast<only work fine for the conversion which are implicitly allowed by the compiler hence the following does not work int *i; double *d; d = i; ...
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further! In this article, you’ll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
0
by: ryjfgjl | last post by:
ExcelToDatabase: batch import excel into database automatically...
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
1
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
0
by: ArrayDB | last post by:
The error message I've encountered is; ERROR:root:Error generating model response: exception: access violation writing 0x0000000000005140, which seems to be indicative of an access violation...
1
by: CloudSolutions | last post by:
Introduction: For many beginners and individual users, requiring a credit card and email registration may pose a barrier when starting to use cloud servers. However, some cloud server providers now...
1
by: Defcon1945 | last post by:
I'm trying to learn Python using Pycharm but import shutil doesn't work
1
by: Shællîpôpï 09 | last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....
0
by: Faith0G | last post by:
I am starting a new it consulting business and it's been a while since I setup a new website. Is wordpress still the best web based software for hosting a 5 page website? The webpages will be...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.