CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c++enumsoperatorsoverloadingambiguous
portingportingporting
portingportingporting

Reputation: 71

c++ conversion operator overloading, enums, ints and chars

When I try to compile (with gcc 4.3.4) this code snippet:

enum SimpleEnum {
    ONEVALUE
};

void myFunc(int a) {
}

void myFunc(char ch) {
}

struct MyClass {
    operator int() const { return 0; };
    operator SimpleEnum() const { return ONEVALUE; };
};

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
    myFunc(MyClass());
}

I get this error:

test.cc: In function "int main(int, char**)":
test.cc:17: error: call of overloaded "myFunc(MyClass)" is ambiguous
test.cc:5: note: candidates are: void myFunc(int)
test.cc:8: note:                 void myFunc(char)

I think I (almost) understand what the problem is, i.e. (simplifying it a lot) even if I speak about "char" and "enum", they all are integers and then the overloading is ambiguous.

Anyway, the thing I don't really understand is that if I remove the second overloading of myFunc OR one of the conversion operators of MyClass, I have no compilation errors.

Since I'm going to change A LOT of old code because of this problem (I'm porting code from an old version of HP-UX aCC to g++ 4.3.4 under Linux), I would like to understand better the whole thing in order to choose the best way to modify the code.

Thank you in advance for any help.

Upvotes: 7

Views: 2192

Answers (3)

Antonio Pérez
Antonio Pérez

Reputation: 6982

enums are types in C++, unlike C.

There are implicit conversions for both enum -> char and enum -> int. The compiler just doesn't know which one to choose.

EDIT: After trying with different tests:

  • When the definition for custom conversion MyClass -> int is removed, code compiles.

    • Here there is implicit conversion for enum to int and so it is the one favored by the compiler over the one to char. Test here.

  • When the definition for void myFunc(int) is removed compilation fails.

    • Compiler tries to convert from MyClass to char and finds that, not having a user defined conversion operator char(), both user defined int() and SimpleEnum() may be used. Test here.

  • When you add a char() conversion operator for MyClass compilation fails with the same error as if not.

    • Test here.

So the conclusion I come up with here is that in your originally posted code compiler has to decide which of the two overloaded versions of myFunc should be called. Since both conversions are possible:

  1. MyClass to int via user defined conversion operator.
  2. MyClass to int via user defined conversion (MyClass to SimpleEnum) + implicit conversion (SimpleEnum to char)

compiler knows not which one to use.

Upvotes: 4

Kerrek SB
Kerrek SB

Reputation: 477100

The conversion from MyClass is ambiguous, as there is one conversion to int and one to the enum, which is itself implicitly convertible to int, and both are equally good conversions. You can just make the call explicit, though, by specifying which conversion you want:

myfunc(int(MyClass()));

Alternatively, you might like to rethink why you have a function that has separate overloads for int and char, perhaps that could be redesigned as well.

Upvotes: 4

K-ballo
K-ballo

Reputation: 81349

I would have expected that the int overload is called. Tried a few compilers and got different results. If you are going to remove anything, remove the user conversion operator to int, since enums have a standard conversion to ints.

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions