220 16085 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: mobi phil Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: const T* operator->() const Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 10:30:36 +0100 Lines: 71 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <56a7727d-9839-45c9-be72-a6ecb61f38c9@isocpp.org> <79072019.ttkhiFK88n@tjmaciei-mobl4> <3423283.QTSUnJKSPh@tjmaciei-mobl4> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f8f8a8f3d31050e7c3077 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1423301439 12383 80.91.229.3 (7 Feb 2015 09:30:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2015 09:30:39 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDF3H34L74HRBPNW26TAKGQE7HDFCYY@isocpp.org Sat Feb 07 10:30:39 2015 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 1YK1ip-0000kX-3N for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 10:30:39 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-ob0-f200.google.com with SMTP id vb8sf123425431obc.3 for ; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 01:30:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe :list-unsubscribe; bh=WCeNHsosJdXs5dMl0oL5r37hUHxbLw2M2cOoqlQ0Zog=; b=Jxw28d/soeTm2YOgpBrbDjODGnsnZyvAfdRCX3PKLUzri5u/t4l5kYCWM9ZSIp2crO sYOQ0a2y+ZsXWcNt7dRtu+X1HBCwPfCDLaoUVU3kHlwvItwHidWOxH8cwMd0jDMMYOV+ dvmkDm6wzbZeSMl0z/EZr1l9pMklzbENpj0IBcuO9xOO3ACl978vODXv4R0ZK9oOmcua XjmNRilx0A9Me98OuKffYawxlxsn8J93ULnAzInlZoODMWHiaSGcKhbjosZYUr5mRke1 qdtSCTha7mMekCeD1TDNITIqkpSZV2/k6GIMQO3dpwtoHC7ulhE2M061fltGtRjCuYoB iT+g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlwYbrpfD6dUIoYQUPGVPzPqHoCoF14Eb50QLijf7zh18fyFqafX7ACRmRbAP63G8mGaCgY X-Received: by 10.182.126.196 with SMTP id na4mr7172026obb.18.1423301438134; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 01:30:38 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.107.162.10 with SMTP id l10ls1002763ioe.15.gmail; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 01:30:37 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.42.211.200 with SMTP id gp8mr2274702icb.93.1423301437407; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 01:30:37 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com (mail-ie0-f170.google.com. [209.85.223.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f3si3590306icw.57.2015.02.07.01.30.37 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 07 Feb 2015 01:30:37 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: none (google.com: mobi@mobiphil.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) client-ip=209.85.223.170; Original-Received: by iecvy18 with SMTP id vy18so6830554iec.8 for ; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 01:30:37 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.107.8.67 with SMTP id 64mr15879213ioi.67.1423301436965; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 01:30:36 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.50.186.167 with HTTP; Sat, 7 Feb 2015 01:30:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3423283.QTSUnJKSPh@tjmaciei-mobl4> X-Original-Sender: mobi@mobiphil.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=none (google.com: mobi@mobiphil.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) smtp.mail=mobi@mobiphil.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:16085 Archived-At: --001a113f8f8a8f3d31050e7c3077 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > My point is that even if there were an operator that did what you > proposed, it > would IMHO be of little value. > > While it would not be of little value for you, would be of great value for others. Maybe it would bother you that a simpler COW construct could be implemented than the one in Qt. > There would be more value if the constness or not could be determined by > further operations down the line. > So you are contradicting yourself. While the conclusion of the thread is more or less exactly this this would be value but no value... maybe you can decide yourself. -- --- 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/. --001a113f8f8a8f3d31050e7c3077 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
My point is that even if there were an operator that did what = you proposed, it
would IMHO be of little value.

While it would not be of little value for you, would = be of great value for others. Maybe it would bother you that a simpler COW = construct could be implemented than the one in Qt.
=C2=A0
There would be more value if the constness or not could be determined by further operations down the line.

So yo= u are contradicting yourself. While the conclusion of the thread is more or= less exactly this this would be value but no value... maybe you can decide= yourself.


--

---
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>.
--001a113f8f8a8f3d31050e7c3077-- .