220 7014 <06e15a1f-0f12-408f-b0cd-077669caeb31@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: snk_kid Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Unnamed LValues Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 09:12:13 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 76 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <06e15a1f-0f12-408f-b0cd-077669caeb31@isocpp.org> References: <0d9b268f-cd3a-4048-a0a3-50cff02b28ce@isocpp.org> <525031B5.80202@wanadoo.fr> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_135_23245467.1380989533643" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1380989530 7373 80.91.229.3 (5 Oct 2013 16:12:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2013 16:12:10 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCG6DCXN7IPRBXXUYCJAKGQEU6CAPXQ@isocpp.org Sat Oct 05 18:12:15 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qc0-f200.google.com ([209.85.216.200]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VSUSl-0007eZ-F6 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 18:12:15 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qc0-f200.google.com with SMTP id x20sf10087291qcv.11 for ; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 09:12:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe :content-type; bh=jrJP355nKfGDYh2dSK5V6HTK0zDo4Ctj6il4B+djbtE=; b=qOxYPCuJdStKiQf1uTn8D4DpCmiPY2mizF8+I/3yDoUkPnlXvZrQKrxJCoHsfYewnD rLmAXQbZU9AZpzkn6rOFK+9zmUBgYy1D6irj/ZdUlbJj+dNVCSzzDUIXIHp6we2haQgJ ZT3m2PYVpjUocze8Am5Dx9ViS2dIjJyi2ugRwnJW30DoZ1KwW5YUQK5ho16fPAVMmJ0u 4tfg+5jwJ0f3vfEV3KRaTX/qxH/FnLwmIz4g1NfnGdyZC7UH5XPNO2RqVojvC9Zj4QgK MTWjHtCn7nyOaG7hTRO2JHOFY0FkYuSlHzGTx8T3KfYvggow9649DzZOQUeUpZ6aoqAK +sjQ== X-Received: by 10.236.36.39 with SMTP id v27mr17710392yha.5.1380989534496; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 09:12:14 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.49.121.164 with SMTP id ll4ls1715315qeb.17.gmail; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 09:12:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.49.3.134 with SMTP id c6mr812469qec.0.1380989533997; Sat, 05 Oct 2013 09:12:13 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <525031B5.80202@wanadoo.fr> X-Original-Sender: korcan.hussein@googlemail.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:7014 Archived-At: ------=_Part_135_23245467.1380989533643 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > All this is useful, but this doesn't support control flow leaving the > block. > Well you can still use return statements for early exits (at particular level) and throw exceptions. You wouldn't be able to jump/goto labels in different scopes and a nesting of with-functions and/or lambda expressions would make early outs more difficult/ugly but you get can those back again functionality-wise with continuations or co-routines for which we may be getting one of those (and they are both equivalent to each other). Once you have higher-order functions and Continuation Moands you can implement (almost) any kind of control flow possible with just functions & lamdba expressions. Even without this, this should be more than enough in most cases and like I was saying earlier, if the nesting of with-functions is too cumbersome you maybe able to generalize a version with variadic templates/initializer-lists that lets you write a single with-expression and only have a single lambda "scope". This was my in my second example. -- --- 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/. ------=_Part_135_23245467.1380989533643 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
All this is useful, but this doesn't support control flow leaving the block.

Well you can still use return= statements for early exits (at particular level) and throw exceptions.
=
You wouldn't be able to jump/goto labels in different scopes and a nest= ing of with-functions and/or lambda expressions would make early outs more = difficult/ugly but you get can those back again functionality-wise with con= tinuations or co-routines for which we may be getting one of those (and the= y are both equivalent to each other).

Once you have higher-order fun= ctions and Continuation Moands you can implement (almost) any kind of contr= ol flow possible with just functions & lamdba expressions.

Even = without this, this should be more than enough in most cases and like I was = saying earlier, if the nesting of with-functions is too cumbersome you may= be able to generalize a version with variadic templates/initializer-lists t= hat lets you write a single with-expression and only have a single lambda "= scope". This was my in my second example.

--
 
---
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>.
------=_Part_135_23245467.1380989533643-- .