Content words, such as nouns, adjectives and verbs, carry anexplicit meaning.───实词(如名词、形容词和动词)表达明确的意思。 Because not all bytes can be converted to a digit, the conversion is explicit, meaning that a cast must be used, as shown in the───由于不是所有字节都可以转换...
unequivocal, univocal, unambiguous - admitting of no doubt or misunderstanding; having only one meaning or interpretation and leading to only one conclusion; "unequivocal evidence"; "took an unequivocal position"; "an unequivocal success"; "an unequivocal promise"; "an unequivocal (or univocal) st...
CType is an inline function, meaning the compiled code makes the conversion, often without generating a function call. This improves performance.For a comparison of CType with the other type conversion keywords, see DirectCast and TryCast.
The first choice that satisfies the requirements of the respective cast operator is selected, even if it is ill-formed (see example). If astatic_castfollowed by aconst_castis used and the conversion can be interpreted in more than one way as such, the conversion is ill-formed. ...
息的明示意义(explicit meaning)和暗含意义(implicit meaning)的基础上最大限度地再现原作者的真实意图 I。 www.benkelunwen.cn|基于11个网页 2. 外在意义 [9]外在意义(Explicit meaning)可以被归结为影片给人们留下的重点印象,是一种对影片宽泛的总结,关于外在意义的详细 … ...
Both constructors (other thancopy/move) and user-defined conversion functions may be function templates; the meaning ofexplicitdoes not change. A(token that followsexplicitis always parsed as part of the explicit specifier: structS{explicit(S)(constS&);// error in C++20, OK in C++17explicit(...
I'm not exactly sure how this helps the type system, since technically that would need to have implicit conversion from ref<T> to T (where T is expected). I think we also agreed previously to have no implicit casts, so this doesn't sound nice from the type system perspective. The ...
' to 'bool'. An explicit conversion exists (are you missing a cast?) As the others statedbool?is not equal tobool.bool?can also benull, seeNullable<t>(msdn). If you know what thenullstate wants to imply, you easily can use the ?? - null-coalescing operator (msdn) to convert ...
//Let´s say "chkDisplay.IsChecked = null" has the same meaning as "chkDisplay.IsChecked = false" for you //Let "check" be the value of "chkDisplay.IsChecked", unless "chkDisplay.IsChecked" is null, in which case "check = false" ...
These too very closely looking syntaxes have quite a different meaning and so are not intuitive. This is not much of a problem right now becauseGetter visibility must be the same as property visibilityso there is no point in using the latter construct, but may be once this restriction is ...