220 10803 <8B5908A9-B678-4C1C-B1C8-5C8484946D26@gmail.com> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Krauss Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Core Issue: deleted templates Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 23:15:11 +0800 Lines: 31 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <8B5908A9-B678-4C1C-B1C8-5C8484946D26@gmail.com> References: Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1400944529 11053 80.91.229.3 (24 May 2014 15:15:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 15:15:29 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCW25A7E3QCRBB7PQKOAKGQEPNXDISQ@isocpp.org Sat May 24 17:15:22 2014 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 1WoDfN-0004AH-NR for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 May 2014 17:15:21 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qc0-f197.google.com with SMTP id w7sf20793333qcr.8 for ; Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :message-id:references: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=1O8Z5mOzsTH34AhF0CXgMttZHdTZjOadrWUT54u8iFo=; b=VrU8xw6dddwmxq4ynmNoUYXc+QqxECwF46mM1jhlPbIztwZtKJlETllP3gv0RIhteq f+iZ7ySYGBBSXoJDNQLzb8MOKx1y5+7nzx3ffnc41fmNlSVU2ctf1m8UZ0e3deL7AVzy vZ8qqkyquvLWw3HJygj+cKN4SV2ZlwNJO6/IztmTV8cR1aRieA7JIH1GHDqDlWHQ4c0P 24wVQsj0lwS61Z9noXaOko0Eyl7YWmaR76uRh42IyA+5Nj57wNGm0J0SEjg6PKf1HtSD KTYGDEX8jUUxw2NvROtq+qPpuCbA+NPGp8eqvDLroEVHZLqzuyxS1gPtWhs28W1hs5Eu W5yQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQksddXf0CwXsg5/pjiUJFTo3g4GNeZ0iPoMYIWXMxB3P+UO5gHOMBaIYvd6L+6m9HYjDDJO X-Received: by 10.236.156.232 with SMTP id m68mr4639877yhk.18.1400944520947; Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:20 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.50.12.37 with SMTP id v5ls840865igb.38.gmail; Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.61.141 with SMTP id p13mr12327855igr.38.1400944519725; Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-ig0-x233.google.com (mail-ig0-x233.google.com [2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id vo10si11136298icb.53.2014.05.24.08.15.19 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of potswa@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233; Original-Received: by mail-ig0-f179.google.com with SMTP id hn18so1755832igb.0 for ; Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.61.141 with SMTP id p13mr12327843igr.38.1400944519582; Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:19 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [172.20.10.2] ([121.54.54.41]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u10sm12533163igz.21.2014.05.24.08.15.16 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 24 May 2014 08:15:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2) X-Original-Sender: potswa@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of potswa@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=potswa@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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:10803 Archived-At: On 2014-05-24, at 9:26 PM, Douglas Boffey wrote: > May be classes in general should be able to be deleted--this would make it consistent with functions being deleteable. > > That would also allow classes that are no longer maintained (after presumably being deprecated) to be deleted. I just suggested this. There are several use cases. > If that were the case, should unions, enums and enum classes be delete able? Unions are classes. Enumerations (scoped and unscoped) are complete types after an opaque-enum-declaration, so may be used to declare objects. It would be odd if you subsequently could not declare objects after the definition as deleted. Do you have a use case in mind? > Should enum tags be deleteable: > > enum class A {p, q = delete, r}; > > If so, presumably r would take the value of 2, not 1 in the above definition. Looks nice, it's a good way to name reserved bits without allowing them to be used. Probably needs to go into a separate proposal though. -- --- 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/. .