Re: Another approach to forward/move issues
On Mar 7, 5:10 am, "W Karas" <wka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Mar 6, 12:40 pm, howard.hinn...@gmail.com (Howard Hinnant) wrote:> In article <1173184878.379660.46...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"W Karas" <wka...@yahoo.com> wrote:
.
'swap(rvalue C &other)' seems more intuitive to me.
<shrug>The currently proposed syntax was chosen so as to avoid the need
to introduce new keywords. Syntax such as you suggest was considered.
.
Seems like there's lots of new kewords in C++09 anyway. But, if
rvalue types are otherwise superior to rvalue references, I would
vote for introducing the weird notion of a scoped keyword:
swap(std::rvalue C &other)
if making rvalue a "normal" keyword is unacceptable.
There exists no concept of a "scoped" keyword in C++. If
you would just introduce this concept, this would influence large
parts of the language and basically every compiler vendor would
have to reimplement it's most interior and up to that moment
long tested "kernel part" - this is most probably inacceptable
compared to the benefits (at least on the first sight).
Besides the disadvantages characterized above something
like your proposed entity std::rvalue does not fit into the
language. From the way you propose to use it, most would
expect it to be a type, not a specifier. But std::rvalue C makes
no sense at all. Or can I declare something like
std::rvalue mydatum;
? In short, this leads to many asymmetries compared to the
existing language.
Yes, there exists advantages of an alternative idea, that is the
idea of a context-related keyword (most notably the fact that it
makes it easier to introduce new context-related keywords
without fear of breaking code), but to the same high initial costs,
because it would invalidate current C++ parsing the same way
as your "scoped" keyword ansatz.
Greetings from Bremen,
Daniel Kr?gler
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.comeaucomputing.com/csc/faq.html ]