220 5941 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ville Voutilainen Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Properties Syntax Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:42:25 +0300 Lines: 81 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <5e23a0e9-2bd9-4f62-aa83-47bea8144eae@isocpp.org> <521DAAF4.3050100@beamways.com> <521DE3EC.4040404@beamways.com> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0139ff76e2d72d04e50228a4 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1377697344 8669 80.91.229.3 (28 Aug 2013 13:42:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:42:24 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBC5JHI7A7ALRBQP466IAKGQEJSNINEI@isocpp.org Wed Aug 28 15:42:27 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qc0-f197.google.com ([209.85.216.197]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VEg0x-0006t5-37 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 15:42:27 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qc0-f197.google.com with SMTP id l13sf6326450qcy.8 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=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:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=aFSZPNmel+wGWiemEKbX69NU2zQ3bfngbquvpPqkVEI=; b=whDwuq1wxK+qnTLg1RUgldyqa2WyM38fY4v2S4yvlsF4ES+uf+fBs0QVbmcn2zCuL5 RRJlsXhQ0XiqCqFQMXsCnJ+8veXdrVGudwqqunTbmCbMjR3LRYrFGDUICC+MYgxcT0ZX RydVAcJeIvDKvMmYBgEg15JaxknFZhIEOPfWn22b6dF20fXuUXgkGGh/BPGCiAp7LA5B cv62sg30jtY6bB5ZmBr47zrvghIxlXFDTDM6aQz2xQ7IfvYTOXi5KmQeSmjl8RB5VVDF Yz4dpqDHDrEmIdYCZ4WotJSbz+R6CNtfECqzrHXTk/v+8wG9NxPp5n04NkrzjGEYDyRx vd3w== X-Received: by 10.236.63.165 with SMTP id a25mr9935694yhd.43.1377697346214; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:26 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.49.127.99 with SMTP id nf3ls358780qeb.83.gmail; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.229.129.3 with SMTP id m3mr7949362qcs.13.1377697345711; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:25 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-qa0-x230.google.com (mail-qa0-x230.google.com [2607:f8b0:400d:c00::230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r4si10622823qai.22.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:25 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of ville.voutilainen@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c00::230 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400d:c00::230; Original-Received: by mail-qa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id hu16so404534qab.14 for ; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.224.166.197 with SMTP id n5mr1924585qay.98.1377697345490; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:25 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.224.195.8 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 06:42:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: ville.voutilainen@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of ville.voutilainen@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400d:c00::230 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=ville.voutilainen@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) d=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:5941 Archived-At: --089e0139ff76e2d72d04e50228a4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 28 August 2013 15:32, wrote: > > > On Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:50:04 PM UTC+2, Bengt Gustafsson wrote: >> >> Do they really have syntax which is significiantly simpler than the >> classic setter/getter pair of C++? >> >> > Properties are about the usage syntax, not the declaration syntax. > > > > If that's the case (with which I disagree), we certainly don't need any language changes for properties, since public non-static data members of reference or proxy class type achieve the usage syntax just fine. -- --- 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/. --089e0139ff76e2d72d04e50228a4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On 28 August 2013 15:32, <cornedbee@google.com> = wrote:


O= n Wednesday, August 28, 2013 1:50:04 PM UTC+2, Bengt Gustafsson wrote: =20 =20 =20
Do they really have syntax which is significiantly simpler than the classic setter/getter pair of C++?

Properties are about the usage syntax, n=
ot the declaration syntax.=A0









If that's the case=
 (with which I disagree), we certainly don't need any language changes =
for
properties, since public non-static data members of reference or pro=
xy class type achieve

the usage syntax just fine.






-- 

 

--- 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail 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/<=
/a>.


--089e0139ff76e2d72d04e50228a4--

.