220 6990 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Smith Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Unnamed LValues Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 19:16:43 -0700 Lines: 117 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b677efa9d52de04e7f502a3 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1380939403 26450 80.91.229.3 (5 Oct 2013 02:16:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 02:16:43 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDVNBJG4YAIBBC7NXWJAKGQEOTYXTGI@isocpp.org Sat Oct 05 04:16:48 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qa0-f69.google.com ([209.85.216.69]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VSHQD-0003CK-7b for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 04:16:45 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qa0-f69.google.com with SMTP id cm18sf4168527qab.0 for ; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:16:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=mime-version:sender: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=+s18s8QhoFgXhXDMZf6BOWVfH4liaG0SzVuRXCHCB7I=; b=c1Sd3CX3rcPYz+5pTvJAeeZtY00h432FK4FKISpYCwOols0bVAH6h4vJmHxT3HHHnI kVB3jaO10F5ySxSQVantglhn39L/pdqOK43JfZ5z09ln48Cn5EFxNXc6MrEXKOBKhggr LFzWpPwckrQFJiHZgIi4fPKmlTc4NkC3Ja2SVf04ORdfn528wH4dko3Dj/5/BcM+gjci 9dZPGqSPKRqyV5LwFuahr9FlWSXS7Xp48qM0Am0uGAZy/1+48/uyUmpjwW7Cp3DW8AFk 1/2uLbVlt2tDbo2+fsQ067zsd/mSz3GEbqP+KddNZ67f4leqYf4SeGI2su3D++8O7AfF WBCA== X-Received: by 10.236.32.74 with SMTP id n50mr16618538yha.13.1380939404324; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:16:44 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.49.134.74 with SMTP id pi10ls1549255qeb.35.gmail; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:16:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.58.74.38 with SMTP id q6mr15183586vev.9.1380939403788; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-vb0-x234.google.com (mail-vb0-x234.google.com [2607:f8b0:400c:c02::234]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g2si4245427vch.28.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of metafoo@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c02::234 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c02::234; Original-Received: by mail-vb0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f12so2698477vbg.11 for ; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:16:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.58.137.167 with SMTP id qj7mr14775174veb.1.1380939403708; Fri, 04 Oct 2013 19:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Original-Sender: metafoo@gmail.com Original-Received: by 10.220.244.137 with HTTP; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 19:16:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: richard@metafoo.co.uk X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of metafoo@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c02::234 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=metafoo@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:6990 Archived-At: --047d7b677efa9d52de04e7f502a3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Zhihao Yuan wrote: > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Richard Smith > wrote: > > /*template std::lock_guard locked(Mutex &);*/ > > > > locked(my_mutex) { > > } > > This reminds me Python's with statement. In C++, it may > look like: > > with (expr) { > The 'using' keyword would be unambiguous here. > // ... > } > > If you need a name, > > with (auto name = expr) { > } > Would this be exactly identical to { auto name = expr; // ... } ? > And I can further imagine that this requires a > _compound-statement_, so that we can have > > struct A { > A() with (expr) { > } > }; -- --- 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/. --047d7b677efa9d52de04e7f502a3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Zhihao Yuan <zy@miator.net> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 9:33 PM, Richard Smith <richard@metafoo.co.uk> wrote:
> =A0 /*template<typename Mutex> std::lock_guard<Mutex> lock= ed(Mutex &);*/
>
> =A0 locked(my_mutex) {
> =A0 }

This reminds me Python's with statement. =A0In C++, it may
look like:

=A0 with (expr) {

The 'using' k= eyword would be unambiguous here.
=A0
=A0 =A0 // ...
=A0 }

=A0 If you need a name,

=A0 with (auto name =3D expr) {
=A0 }

Would this be exactly identical t= o

{
=A0 auto name =3D expr;
= =A0 // ...
}

?
=A0
And I can further imagine that this requires a
_compound-statement_, so that we can have

=A0 struct A {
=A0 =A0 A() with (expr) {
=A0 =A0 }
=A0 };

--
 
---
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>.
--047d7b677efa9d52de04e7f502a3-- .