<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Ref<T> should support indirection operator *"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233384#c6">Comment # 6</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Ref<T> should support indirection operator *"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233384">bug 233384</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:rniwa@webkit.org" title="Ryosuke Niwa <rniwa@webkit.org>"> <span class="fn">Ryosuke Niwa</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Jean-Yves Avenard [:jya] from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=233384#c4">comment #4</a>)
<span class="quote">> (In reply to Ryosuke Niwa from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=233384#c3">comment #3</a>)
> > I'm pretty this is an intentional design choice because we wanted it to act
> > like a reference.
>
> Indeed that was the intent, but the lack of operator.() in C++ makes it that
> you have to use -> to dereference it; as such, in practice it works like a
> pointer.</span >
Just because the presence of operator-> doesn't make it a pointer like. Ref::operator! works like T::operator! so it's not pointer-like in that regard for example. In fact, almost everything else doesn't behave like a pointer.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>