Re: void* conversion yields ambiguity upon dereference

MW Ron wrote:

>  "Jonathan Turkanis" <technews@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>> I'm puzzled by this reference to 'operator* (void*)'. Since a void
>> pointer cannot be dereferenced, why should this dereferncing
>> operation be considered during overload resolution?
>
> I thought I replied to this.
>
> This is an error and is corrected in a newer version of CodeWarrior.

Thanks.

My interpretation of Howard's reply to my repost of this message ("Bug
Re****t:
Bogus built-in operator...") was that the bug would be fixed in a future
version
of Codewarrior. Are you saying that the bug is fixed in an
already-released
version?

> Ron

Jonathan