220 24610 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Viacheslav Usov Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: throwaway variable Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 13:00:39 +0100 Lines: 79 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <9658e852-6254-4ecf-a6d4-879160d4de7d@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134ab3ab332ba052c6eb282 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1456228846 10643 80.91.229.3 (23 Feb 2016 12:00:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 12:00:46 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDU6VRPKW4BBB2ETWG3AKGQE6NMNTJQ@isocpp.org Tue Feb 23 13:00:42 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f198.google.com ([209.85.161.198]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aYBdy-0008NW-1X for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 13:00:42 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-yw0-f198.google.com with SMTP id g127sf282262775ywf.0 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isocpp-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=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:x-spam-checked-in-group :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=6a494cFMbxrv1SdvKjwRt2FpdFnSWP8FvBu/1pSIXyg=; b=MGcFgc60opu4Ah6r1T53z/OmW7bWVTgkKqtivKuxY4zbnR7tBuz7gwiMOW/oNoE4hY B4VObgiwitV7YWk0ZXSN+JZo/EGFEmD8NfbgPjoSqog9I7gFZ/Ownr15nenwMSrUoBJm oVj0rLrYJ1XikZRZsB7YlRlVBFT8rBXk9S4rWlbtjjrb58BX1DzRvZyq1u0EuPmHdQc2 TUn3uRLiLNj4AmKXMQDvlVmwGicRpUEEUNxbt5QNRg1wasFQ7erQIYIyotH2LbWtzRmF 2yjxMt9xFIi9MzmoY6vGMcmDgGi2CbOQAW0Q12cVqewv5Hb0KMuOpC+gGjz0ZpVo4HlT Cqeg== 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:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=6a494cFMbxrv1SdvKjwRt2FpdFnSWP8FvBu/1pSIXyg=; b=L8jg5BMiha8kNmT33Tr9Xsvh5SdRiIhUJ0npL9zh6r0fWZyZDfo3VxPMLv4W2aTOMd uWK9RHWqNd8WwDPonvjnwdWOXB6Bunmy6Ys0bd4vwFD50K+vu10UUnHhrYcTJEAjzzfI 6N8ufUTkH63FScKf0NSXCrK4wrRowTprL5Hp/TmZ9SocdhTVCePasptchpbtwg9lvQAe Ha5upg89UsX9oz864dAICy6t8uZtHT+FJLy3NzN0C+tr+20M7rYA1+xAdIjW/bde1q+M mpGECZGGAW2u2TqDsVsfaFk6xp3w+DySVe2tKADN0IcFbWPSgudMmJ0KmkpGeRsWHojE Rr/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORYgj8H8ZZ65Wp9ckqZ7w5PYsE/kwEPKhlASRCvvaiEFo9pGl/NNIZ7ylVjA1QKJQ== X-Received: by 10.140.19.161 with SMTP id 30mr3911911qgh.20.1456228841142; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:41 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.182.121.161 with SMTP id ll1ls1045829obb.28.gmail; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:39 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.182.20.238 with SMTP id q14mr26601279obe.33.1456228839852; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:39 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from mail-ob0-x230.google.com (mail-ob0-x230.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4003:c01::230]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dh8si21547815obb.81.2016.02.23.04.00.39 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:39 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of via.usov@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4003:c01::230 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4003:c01::230; Original-Received: by mail-ob0-x230.google.com with SMTP id gc3so191834087obb.3 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:39 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.182.252.108 with SMTP id zr12mr962084obc.2.1456228839663; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:39 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.76.170.70 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Feb 2016 04:00:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: via.usov@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of via.usov@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4003:c01::230 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=via.usov@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-Spam-Checked-In-Group: std-proposals@isocpp.org 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:24610 Archived-At: --001a1134ab3ab332ba052c6eb282 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Matthew Woehlke wrote: > (=C2=B9 See Viacheslav Usov's most recent post re: lifetime extension for= a > contrary opinion - so far, the only one expressed in this thread.) > I do not think I said anything really contrarian. I definitely do see a need for anonymous variables; the interpretation as a lifetime extension of temporaries is secondary. I am leaning toward lifetime extension because that could be made syntactically an expression, which has a value (l-value), which can be used in a greater expression, thus making it possible to refer to the otherwise inaccessible variable. With respect to anonymous looping variables, frankly, I do not think I have ever missed them, but that may be just me. Cheers, V. --=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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp= ..org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAA7YVg2%3DjXgrMK-ud6VzMim0R2eHAr_MWXUmfY9_a2Lbq= -RKLA%40mail.gmail.com. --001a1134ab3ab332ba052c6eb282 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On M= on, Feb 22, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Matthew Woehlke <mwoehlke.floss@gmail= ..com> wrote:
=C2=A0
(=C2=B9 See Viacheslav Usov's most recent post re: lifetime exte= nsion for a
contrary opinion - so far, the only one expressed in this thread.)

I do not think I said anything really contraria= n. I definitely do see a need for anonymous variables; the interpretation a= s a lifetime extension of temporaries is secondary.

I am leaning toward lifetime extension because that could be made syntact= ically an expression, which has a value (l-value), which can be used in a g= reater expression, thus making it possible to refer to the otherwise inacce= ssible variable.

With respect to anonymous looping= variables, frankly, I do not think I have ever missed them, but that may b= e just me.

Cheers,
V.

--
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.
To view this discussion on the web visit h= ttps://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAA7YVg2%3DjXgr= MK-ud6VzMim0R2eHAr_MWXUmfY9_a2Lbq-RKLA%40mail.gmail.com.
--001a1134ab3ab332ba052c6eb282-- .