Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In the C family of languages and ALGOL 68, the word cast typically refers to an explicit type conversion (as opposed to an implicit conversion), causing some ambiguity about whether this is a re-interpretation of a bit-pattern or a real data representation conversion. More important is the multitude of ways and rules that apply to what data ...
The cast operator is not overloadable, but one can write a conversion operator method which lives in the target class. Conversion methods can define two varieties of operators, implicit and explicit conversion operators. The implicit operator will cast without specifying with the cast operator (()) and the explicit operator requires it to be used.
Any user-defined conversion must be explicitly marked as explicit or implicit, unlike C++ copy constructors and conversion operators, which are both implicit by default. C# has explicit support for covariance and contravariance in generic types, [16]: 144 [20]: 23 unlike C++ which has some degree of support for contravariance simply through the ...
When the unmanaged data types become too complex for a simple implicit conversion from and to managed types, the framework allows the user to define attributes on the function, return, and/or the parameters to explicitly refine how the data should be marshaled so as not to lead to exceptions in trying to do so implicitly.
implicit with optional explicit typing static with optional dynamic typing Bro: strong implicit with optional explicit typing nominal static C: weak explicit nominal static C--weak static C++ (ISO/IEC 14882) weak explicit with optional implicit typing (by using auto in C++11) nominal static [TS 2] C* weak explicit static C#: strong [2]
There are many examples of languages that allow implicit type conversions, but in a type-safe manner. For example, both C++ and C# allow programs to define operators to convert a value from one type to another with well-defined semantics. When a C++ compiler encounters such a conversion, it treats the operation just like a function call.
Autoboxing is the term for getting a reference type out of a value type just through type conversion (either implicit or explicit). The compiler automatically supplies the extra source code that creates the object. For example, in versions of Java prior to J2SE 5.0, the following code did not compile:
public class Fruit {} // parent class public class Apple extends Fruit {} // child class public static void main (String [] args) {// The following is an implicit upcast: Fruit parent = new Apple (); // The following is a downcast. Here, it works since the variable `parent` is // holding an instance of Apple: Apple child = (Apple) parent;}