220 13361 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Myriachan Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Tighten rules for virtual override keyword combination Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 22:36:35 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 103 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <19267205-7e26-4c12-b9b4-f26ab2f99eb7@isocpp.org> <803262EF-88B4-40B0-AC9B-7C7356CDE56A@gmail.com> <54274B57.6040007@gmail.com> <8DC1AED8-83B6-453A-A93A-EAB6AF942968@gmail.com> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_4141_1446637824.1412055395730" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1412055408 3181 80.91.229.3 (30 Sep 2014 05:36:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 05:36:48 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDKLT4PURQHRBZUCVGQQKGQE7K3ZFBQ@isocpp.org Tue Sep 30 07:36:42 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-oi0-f72.google.com ([209.85.218.72]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XYq77-0000uu-ID for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 30 Sep 2014 07:36:41 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-f72.google.com with SMTP id e131sf15195216oig.11 for ; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 22:36:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.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=RXwPj1ZxeLpnf4JvUQFec/QGSbe+Y7T79j5AP5e6yhs=; b=pktTQya5KXcQdHdGX6FvwC5CzjZSKYMczFZigkNGzd5HN5yEjHybJABmts+q23kdHi 5LfYmCfomQYT8myjvSjqDMX0zLEV5z4ivkdeDL5ScsX6m6+ywLYYchSR9ASfD4bSLTqX DG1MMI/o4Mlf2mB7TW50B0EXdatWbzOf8Tawit2lje8SbcCTN6UL2/HlZiSc1D7sih3W 3XsAcauzULGdYkB96QnzegNqUast8ktQMia4bfW52SBexfAVo7AzVM4XQDWl/8NQ3eMb i0TMrC6ldW8RRLFq5T/PyMKFTrHDVlKqOLfMB2PRO/UQ3jxKeLPz741KnrqX7FPy2gcp 9log== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state: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=RXwPj1ZxeLpnf4JvUQFec/QGSbe+Y7T79j5AP5e6yhs=; b=RfU73LJFViwTskJI+Wr4LJrxPRLM5EnjmCa3n1wfh6TFhGIPee/AAp0C3Sl67nJ21b 8Hjtr5y/7vEizISssIk6QxYkAHpJ8sZoG2GDKtVNwfPCcd5F6TJMwl2s6+WQuBnpIWon sCdBoYvqBLnitrmWBJ92rwyZZs1ksMionZqlKsIoZTCBDgK+HxP3IRipEAvCaB4GsQAZ tGwGhrzOSpECH6rr1X608Pnkq6RtjxLBItHNRESSRU92e1Nck5HTi3+rK3AC5m5Vsx5C P2j50a8MHxqRxOOmdRqb2WCK5YDjJ4wa58RxjROQ+/bl6Bi5e6gI+F8FQYiF3oU0sBP2 VwHg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmg/sX948yKugB9OGOYw79/cvvnAwQEHskgqTTTcAVkUyF3j43k/XfmpKaPe4E4snnG1kFn X-Received: by 10.42.94.65 with SMTP id a1mr19281726icn.31.1412055398559; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 22:36:38 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.50.66.133 with SMTP id f5ls1117104igt.35.gmail; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 22:36:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.50.13.4 with SMTP id d4mr54511igc.16.1412055397900; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 22:36:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <8DC1AED8-83B6-453A-A93A-EAB6AF942968@gmail.com> X-Original-Sender: myriachan@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:13361 Archived-At: ------=_Part_4141_1446637824.1412055395730 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Saturday, September 27, 2014 11:07:47 PM UTC-7, David Krauss wrote: > > > On 2014=E2=80=9309=E2=80=9328, at 7:42 AM, germinolegrand > wrote: > > - when i see virtual, i know it's the base definition > > > I proposed a while ago on this list to define !override (or not override)= =20 > to provide a base definition, and !final (or not final) as a less obtuse= =20 > synonym for =3D 0, which would not preclude =3D default for destructors.= =20 > There was little interest. > > C++ does not currently have a way to declare base definitions, so every= =20 > derived class is at the mercy of its bases and even their inaccessible=20 > members. > > "new" would be convenient for base definitions, since it's already a=20 keyword. Heck, C# does that, though it does have a secondary meaning. "= =3D=20 0" could be "pure", "abstract", etc. If we didn't want more context=20 keywords in that position, "void" would work because I don't think there's= =20 a grammatical ambiguity. Or "=3D void". Or maybe "=3D nullptr" since we h= ave=20 "=3D 0" now. --=20 ---=20 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 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-proposa= ls/. ------=_Part_4141_1446637824.1412055395730 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Saturday, September 27, 2014 11:07:47 PM UTC-7, David K= rauss wrote:

On 2014=E2=80=9309=E2=80=9328, at 7:42 AM, = germinolegrand <germino...@gmail.co= m> wrote:

- when i see virtual, i know it's the base defi= nition

I proposed a while ag= o on this list to define !override (or not override) to provide a base definition, and !final (or not final= ) as a less obtuse synonym for =3D 0, = which would not preclude =3D default for= destructors. There was little interest.

C++ does = not currently have a way to declare base definitions, so every derived clas= s is at the mercy of its bases and even their inaccessible members.


"new" would be convenient for base= definitions, since it's already a keyword.  Heck, C# does that, thoug= h it does have a secondary meaning.  "=3D 0" could be "pure", "abstrac= t", etc.  If we didn't want more context keywords in that position, "v= oid" would work because I don't think there's a grammatical ambiguity. = ; Or "=3D void".  Or maybe "=3D nullptr" since we have "=3D 0" now.

--

---
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-proposa= ls+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_4141_1446637824.1412055395730-- .