doubt in reference

[Abhishek Parwal]

hey ppl
i was going thru c++ primer its written there that suppose
const int a=5;
int * &p=&a; is error. thats fine
const int *&p =&a is also error . that i think according to like const
*ptr=&a is not error so it even should not be error.
then it says that
int *const &p=&a ; is not an error but when u compile it in VC++ it
gives this as error.
pls clarify why this is anomalous behaviour

[Victor Bazarov]

Abhishek Parwal wrote:

hey ppl
i was going thru c++ primer its written there that suppose
const int a=5;
int * &p=&a; is error. thats fine
const int *&p =&a is also error . that i think according to like const
*ptr=&a is not error so it even should not be error.
The following

const int *&p

declares a reference to a pointer to a constant int. You can only
initialise a reference to non-const anything with an lvalue. If you
take an address of a variable, the result is an *r*value. It cannot
be used to initialise a reference to non-const.

What can work is this

const int * const & p = &a;

which creates a temporary and binds it to the reference to const.
then it says that
int *const &p=&a ; is not an error but when u compile it in VC++ it
gives this as error.
Which error does it give?
pls clarify why this is anomalous behaviour

As soon as you tell us what is "anomalous" here.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[Abhishek Parwal]

thanks a lot