220 4888 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Zhihao Yuan Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Proposal: std::sequence Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 03:19:15 -0400 Lines: 35 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <4551abbc-43aa-4520-a91a-f8eb25a90588@isocpp.org> <2c8e6079-9c87-425a-93e2-39251df57cd8@isocpp.org> <9f1cace3-0503-4a3c-a8ce-d7546564b3ef@isocpp.org> <1c991e6e-6bc3-4822-9ffd-7f2508e63974@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1370416758 12742 80.91.229.3 (5 Jun 2013 07:19:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 07:19:18 +0000 (UTC) To: "std-proposals@isocpp.org" Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCUILMGRQMARB5GMXOGQKGQEDURKRZQ@isocpp.org Wed Jun 05 09:19:18 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-vb0-f71.google.com ([209.85.212.71]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Uk805-0002x1-RK for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:19:18 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-vb0-f71.google.com with SMTP id 11sf1357432vbf.6 for ; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:19:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-beenthere:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-google-group-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=TS6eBBZXm3LMDhSMKO1+ApQGwUgkKcnJgt7RAuNn0sk=; b=eEE7y5i62Wv5hQhzixtbZdw+SNLKtfw4pfqGV6nrSEQTtYMcdR3r3TXGCpQoEGYOG5 bfZwqn0wkRXt+ukrEfTi7kdZO3igKGeVgHVHINsna+Iy63k8uXi1sPe/Bmryh1wJhI4t PAndyUmT118anm7sq3TbDq0gmoV7fQqX87msQfr4dECXJEjnsdySgDYgVqkJX8Q3iJCc vmzudM7Ga/Gz5xAVC3NQz25nZbf2WeugmS786yk1AXp9+HC0KSzvQ7NmKfTSSRATQW4D w38K1GI4Cjq8Fm0LvF3+yv2ONbpJ0uzXSo0mYh7jXkLdTDf1dJ3DXRSKkxygUYvfLZuQ a7Tw== X-Received: by 10.224.36.66 with SMTP id s2mr18266424qad.6.1370416756980; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:19:16 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.49.37.71 with SMTP id w7ls654584qej.69.gmail; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:19:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.220.138.13 with SMTP id y13mr20102308vct.59.1370416755948; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-vc0-f180.google.com (mail-vc0-f180.google.com [209.85.220.180]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 18si39178915vcj.27.2013.06.05.00.19.15 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of lichray@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.180 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.180; Original-Received: by mail-vc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id gd11so873087vcb.11 for ; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:19:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.52.91.77 with SMTP id cc13mr817831vdb.79.1370416755841; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 00:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.220.38.197 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Jun 2013 00:19:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: lichray@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of lichray@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.180 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=lichray@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:4888 Archived-At: On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 3:04 AM, James Dennett wrote: > That's not a correct understanding of the sentence, but that's not > very important. I'm sorry. > I have seen real compilers do similar optimizations that do depend on > const, and I've seen beginners be puzzled by the results (e.g., when > printing the same variable gives two different results at same time, > because the compilers has used the original value in some cases but > not in others). I can only say "I bet" those are not const-based optimizations, those are constant propagation, as shown before in this thread, and those are where we should tell the beginners to use `constexpr` instead. Actually, since you are googlers, I think you should talk to Chandler Carruth; he knows everything :) -- Zhihao Yuan, ID lichray The best way to predict the future is to invent it. ___________________________________________________ 4BSD -- http://4bsd.biz/ -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en. .