220 13869 <5745b39f-5a8b-4b5d-a4fb-f221771ad863@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Bruck Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Proposal for a delete expression for local variables Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:23:40 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 105 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <5745b39f-5a8b-4b5d-a4fb-f221771ad863@isocpp.org> References: <67af811f-e063-4b3e-85d6-5b9e54b00b8f@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_5235_252979900.1413361420406" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1413361430 15935 80.91.229.3 (15 Oct 2014 08:23:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 08:23:50 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDO2X46R4AKRBDO67CQQKGQELFK5AMA@isocpp.org Wed Oct 15 10:23:43 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-ob0-f200.google.com ([209.85.214.200]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XeJrz-0006y4-2R for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:23:43 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-ob0-f200.google.com with SMTP id wn1sf3528587obc.3 for ; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:23:41 -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=yUYzmJ1Rrhud//axGDJl/jkK88N9+PJpONiIgreA/4M=; b=eDY2YSJ4/tMbwBIcSIOSniudGhHRpjF4AqZBAPO987Pctk7cZiPHy2E/wLL5j9Nmz0 U2A5H7NkIzeRC8+Bkw5hfwr6XugfKj/VI7m8+HyIIMJKo7clJKMrzCmHueO1pHjjMtCx REdmwDMQ9vWS/qQLvEORpnzaaGa/17/5c4avKJOFiERqq5XCp/w2ZyKMnDWEwcld1Tgd 7WshqrYg1G3lOJHSQ9KAFRh68j3kcL0bQi7TRxD0/bHJM4OylAeiWnOzL23r/0TOMOMC G9U+wnloyWYdXA7ktPL6o0+2wOQEEkBSd1+CZsyJMfSbmRMhHDw3F3uKB+JSuBzkL9Hp mCdQ== 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=yUYzmJ1Rrhud//axGDJl/jkK88N9+PJpONiIgreA/4M=; b=mRLeSaOrwn2OQjLoohjXGv3BdfJnbg8vBRSgfW0bjVBZtQWbGmaPpmVs8Y4x88vA7m Q6/Sk+o7KSRUMMf4gNxwOVVH1ZZEBqgYrvrR+9KxOdOw6BurO9ayvrQKZ+ZLsMy0yb5N 0IPHvU2K5zo0zGQIH6br4nUjJVg50LH8KexME3ZQr2txLoUXc8X6g+J0nZ650fcVrcmE KnC9TT4cFE/+bmACo7Eys9WdAicNL5qDsjLKMFRdEbnzkgTL1eWvdxts30JgTfCcdmzS eM2B+62UhCqUjxtkwv8FjKi5/s9sYgBQ2cS2q+8vptoQRSI5zrAdz410injEYzOrKeGw F7zA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnAnbvTpEdUyhcnlZhgfVzbA8JQFXPFc1A4FUFFpXAv3I7h0G0BUw1h38V41x0Ir6KmsR07 X-Received: by 10.43.35.205 with SMTP id sx13mr7165920icb.1.1413361421482; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:23:41 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.140.23.72 with SMTP id 66ls139976qgo.54.gmail; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:23:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.101.227 with SMTP id u90mr3372qge.18.1413361420978; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:23:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <67af811f-e063-4b3e-85d6-5b9e54b00b8f@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: bruck.michael@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:13869 Archived-At: ------=_Part_5235_252979900.1413361420406 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 9:33:02 AM UTC+2, Markus Grech wrote: > > Why not just limit the scope by adding an additional pair of {}? Is there > any advantage to using "delete local"? > With {} you lose the use of auto and your code becomes a bit more verbose. Later modifications become a nightmare. And you need the additional state 'constructed but not yet initialized'. I hope I got it right: { some_typename_we_never_wanted_to_type_again1 reply; { some_typename_we_never_wanted_to_type_again2 conn; { some_typename_we_never_wanted_to_type_again3 blob; { auto file = file_open_rlock("data_snippet"); blob = file.fetch_all(); } conn = connect_to_peer("192.128.0.1"); conn.send(blob); } reply = conn.fetch_reply(); } { auto file = file_create("output"); file.write(reply); } } -- --- 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_5235_252979900.1413361420406 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 9:33:02 AM UTC+2, M= arkus Grech wrote:
Why not just limit the scope by adding an additional pair of {}? Is th= ere any advantage to using "delete local"?

With {} you lose the use of auto and your code becomes a bit more ver= bose. Later modifications become a nightmare. And you need the additional s= tate 'constructed but not yet initialized'.

I hope= I got it right:

{
    so= me_typename_we_never_wanted_to_type_again1 reply;

=     {
some_typename_we_never_wanted_to_type_again2 conn;

= {
   some_typename_we_never_wanted_to_type_again3 blob;

   {
auto file =3D file_open_rlock("data_snippet"= );
blob =3D file.fetch_all();
   }

   = ;conn =3D connect_to_peer("192.128.0.1");
   conn.send(blob);
}<= /div>
= reply =3D conn.fetch_reply();
    }

    {
auto file =3D file_create("output");
file.write(reply= );
    }
}

--

---
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_5235_252979900.1413361420406-- .