220 17057 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tony V E Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Post-fix operator declaration change. Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 18:18:28 -0400 Lines: 84 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <22101a9e-0e9a-4e70-b332-a1cd9ced7eb6@isocpp.org> <8e0337ea-ec51-464e-b45d-06d1b4a91839@isocpp.org> <69e71162-a69d-41a8-b48c-d6eef8a46208@isocpp.org> <78c5c7c6-2a1c-4dac-aabd-916685cfc48a@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01493c22a1f611051183585b X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1426630713 30929 80.91.229.3 (17 Mar 2015 22:18:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 22:18:33 +0000 (UTC) To: Standard Proposals Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCUZ5QWKNQILLUFCVACRUBEY4CVG6@isocpp.org Tue Mar 17 23:18:32 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-la0-f72.google.com ([209.85.215.72]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YXzom-00069N-4h for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 23:18:32 +0100 Original-Received: by labgq15 with SMTP id gq15sf4222199lab.0 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:31 -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: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=A5HwS3XADR3Yy9juX+JZprLoHtKnIImO8X1i6FhdpyM=; b=Xnvi4DdK1gvbF8/j65i9f+tAZNM2ZrcFk1qTrtUNjtyqKdQgCtS5A53cZVoWwiPVsK bZcda4wOssxiFk4dTlnsuH3raeih905kjjfjeOtVekr6fAEisCCZmSjw628OXrUEH9/e kfG0lvDz89u7mOJgyVW4MFB2WeU7PXlKwRUd6UmFK2yOkg0/VKFb87BhmLWS5VCRqZrj y6MY7cGEkVUmBXUawtaOA7EagZrEpdRHgdiD8FwCnH+sMHRhpsTmUUyR8pEi1RAc9u2r RrctO+EUI+Fuu/Y5GZKPKz4tTBUMXF65MfZtqfsxg8HzJAI9BAEMTehqXJAxUz5uRU6o y1yg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlBD4MjvC09SxO3R+ipmqPmhwgsXGvcv3+F4VeED3VdGcRPXhkNpXPr6pRy8x7rqGYRixml X-Received: by 10.194.95.67 with SMTP id di3mr10504184wjb.0.1426630710531; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:30 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.180.24.162 with SMTP id v2ls183192wif.17.gmail; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.112.133.35 with SMTP id oz3mr60282168lbb.98.1426630709068; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-la0-x232.google.com (mail-la0-x232.google.com. [2a00:1450:4010:c03::232]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id lt8si11520602lac.76.2015.03.17.15.18.29 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::232 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:4010:c03::232; Original-Received: by lamx15 with SMTP id x15so21238352lam.3 for ; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.152.19.228 with SMTP id i4mr63021956lae.77.1426630708948; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.112.89.41 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Mar 2015 15:18:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: tvaneerd@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:4010:c03::232 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tvaneerd@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:17057 Archived-At: --089e01493c22a1f611051183585b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:03 AM, David Rodr=C3=ADguez Ibeas wrote: > Additionally, in the grand scheme of things I expect a C++ developer to b= e > able to switch from one standard to another, from a legacy project to the > newest green fields task with the newest (even experimental) compiler. I= f > the concern is that the old construct is *hard*, the alternative is havin= g > to learn the same *hard* construct and a different one that might be > simpler. This is not _overall_ simplifying the language but making it mo= re > complex. If this was adopted, I would have to expect my developers to > understand 'operator++(int)' and whatever form fo 'operator++(postfix)', > together with the understanding that they have to be mutually exclusive. > > We can, eventually, stop learning old constructs. ie The 'register' keyword and the old version of 'auto'. Maybe some day we will deprecate typedef. It just takes a long long time. The question is just when is it worth it. Probably isn't worth it in this case. --=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/. --089e01493c22a1f611051183585b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:03 AM, David Rodr=C3=ADguez Ibeas <dibeas@ie= ee.org> wrote:
Additionally, in the grand scheme of things I expect a C++ developer t= o be able to switch from one standard to another, from a legacy project to = the newest green fields task with the newest (even experimental) compiler.= =C2=A0 If the concern is that the old construct is *hard*, the alternative = is having to learn the same *hard* construct and a different one that might= be simpler.=C2=A0 This is not _overall_ simplifying the language but makin= g it more complex.=C2=A0 If this was adopted, I would have to expect my dev= elopers to understand 'operator++(int)' and whatever form fo 'o= perator++(postfix)', together with the understanding that they have to = be mutually exclusive.


We can= , eventually, stop learning old constructs.=C2=A0 ie The 'register'= keyword and the old version of 'auto'.=C2=A0 Maybe some day we wil= l deprecate typedef.=C2=A0 It just takes a long long time.

The question is just when is it worth it.=C2=A0 Probably isn't worth = it in this case.


--

---
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>.
--089e01493c22a1f611051183585b-- .