Why Does Implicit Conversion of a Person Object to a String Result in Overload Resolution Failure?

Overload Resolution Failure During Implicit Conversion of Object to String

Implicit string conversions are generally discouraged, with an operator overload for Person being a more appropriate solution. However, let's examine the following code to illustrate the issue:

<code class="cpp">#include <string>
#include <ostream>
#include <iostream>

struct NameType {
   operator std::string() { return "wobble"; }
};

struct Person {
   NameType name;
};

int main() {
   std::cout << std::string("bobble");
   std::cout << "wibble";

   Person p;
   std::cout << p.name; // Error occurs here
}</code>

The code compiles without errors when using GCC 4.3.4, giving the output:

<code class="Bash">bobble
wibble</code>

However, attempting to implicitly convert the Person object to a string using << operator fails with overload resolution error:

<code class="Bash">prog.cpp:18: error: no match for ‘operator<<’ in ‘std::cout << p.Person::name’</code>

In this instance, the operator << is overloaded to handle std::string and const char*, however, there isn't a predefined overload that accepts a Person object and implicitly converts it to a string. As a result, the compiler fails to resolve the overload.

To rectify this issue, you should define an explicit operator << for the Person struct as a friend function, allowing the implicit conversion from a Person object to a string to work correctly.

The above is the detailed content of Why Does Implicit Conversion of a Person Object to a String Result in Overload Resolution Failure?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!