220 26529 <901ad0a5-1616-4873-80c9-92b34fd592b2@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "'Walt Karas' via ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Proposing: a library header providing a flexible, portable, performant structure bit field facility Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 10:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 94 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <901ad0a5-1616-4873-80c9-92b34fd592b2@isocpp.org> References: <7d635ed8-e567-4515-b51b-137e46b2b203@isocpp.org> <3a4e4ad9-d231-4ffe-b213-b1edc1fe5e4d@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_3084_2011059465.1467478884259" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467478888 19176 80.91.229.3 (2 Jul 2016 17:01:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 17:01:28 +0000 (UTC) To: ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDFLZXWOVYIBBZPG365QKGQEZHX3WPY@isocpp.org Sat Jul 02 19:01:27 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f200.google.com ([209.85.161.200]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bJOIJ-0003oe-Bh for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 19:01:27 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-yw0-f200.google.com with SMTP id v77sf31983988ywg.1 for ; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:01:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isocpp-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=AuVkh5fmYg5Yj49RcRMZbCVd/lZGOK0QTEKxOdtFkZA=; b=TMarM4MqXb9FPWItPcmF1qo8onjnhtG7zg/QQNC14DO2C3Hl37xw2INdLwEGMsOXWy BoK3t0BKJOmc0SZuuqNXge6mbnuaJV5BSJjHjdwzlKbo0Slg1ZXemmaPCqBAVi1UYYzn qfis7Vbc4ykYkjqboAwPN4m/3cEUuTfUXBtOpwIjd+7k0V1ry1NJIZPEe4ZQ+7gkSwFi neaCYn6AVLlmt0WhbSeQVAz7mvQYwWqTO8E16j+NdKMdAcxjhBgu1EJdCRIxSlSc3/ZC 1HuYp0gRJaAv4ofMlUz/hqmwGCUTZ4zvrssKmXpEbpXH8i2TRzbNzu4OhHHzJzFL0o68 wa1w== 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:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help :list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=AuVkh5fmYg5Yj49RcRMZbCVd/lZGOK0QTEKxOdtFkZA=; b=gL+wjglwklwRXVoopDGJvBXy4mQnxlpSj4vE8c+LgUBGerQTloOWNVNbgbiOM5SEOB /8uNZbbNDu/HI4E9AagGojDf1IOKY+/zQik9IgFBhER8JSa+nIQnQOHo1F+T2uklIZxz SIzRd0d8d3thVaoPIr9Y+fqiKpDn526o8MsiZuZ4a1ihTkXAfFSXvzxWd2LpDU1DH/on +POdUHBe6S2cEkq9x1B+BQzVqvXVBme1e03U8vMVUp9CosNEqqFxWMYRz3JhaiVRVORS IGd3iMSeZxSzi3cjTOqMBbWFYC1WWMnmYMPFq+n5Z4L7cC4RlvgUBGLs1g8yjFeLiSgb NKcA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tK0np7Bj4QHOfBGX6ZFJMdHZjfnvZJbI4N8PnvvLwzG5aiXuPdO5oDMd/RqS8X6Jw== X-Received: by 10.129.166.76 with SMTP id d73mr22792177ywh.36.1467478886407; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:01:26 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.107.37.12 with SMTP id l12ls908123iol.40.gmail; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:01:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.230.69 with SMTP id e66mr155453ith.0.1467478885411; Sat, 02 Jul 2016 10:01:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: wkaras@yahoo.com X-Original-From: Walt Karas 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:26529 Archived-At: ------=_Part_3084_2011059465.1467478884259 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_3085_1920672626.1467478884259" ------=_Part_3085_1920672626.1467478884259 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:22:07 PM UTC-4, Nicol Bolas wrote: > > On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 11:40:07 AM UTC-4, Walt Karas wrote: >> >> It seems straightforward that pointers to accessible members of members >> would have generally the same uses as pointers to accessible members. >> > > ... why? > > Member pointers aren't exactly the most useful C++ feature in the world > as-is. They serve a function, to be sure. But it's not clear what the point > of getting a member pointer to a base class subobject for a type would be. > If one doesn't consider member pointers to be a worthy feature, it's unlikely one would see tweeking them as a worthy effort. I have hopes that people who use bit fields, or wish they were more usable, will like my library. And want to see it made more clean with tweeks to the Standard. I would think others would like my library because it helps provide grounds for depricating bit fields in the base language. But it's understandable they would not want to put it in the Standard or tweek the Standard to improve it. The library has very high de facto portability, so putting it in the Standard would primarily serve to advertise it. It might open a floodgate to start putting (more) libraries in the Standard to advertise them. -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/901ad0a5-1616-4873-80c9-92b34fd592b2%40isocpp.org. ------=_Part_3085_1920672626.1467478884259 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 12:22:07 PM UTC-4, Ni= col Bolas wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 11:40:07 AM UTC-4, Walt Karas wrote:
It seems straightfor= ward that pointers to accessible members of members would have generally th= e same uses as pointers to accessible members.

... why?

Member pointers aren't exactly the most useful C++= feature in the world as-is. They serve a function, to be sure. But it'= s not clear what the point of getting a member pointer to a base class subo= bject for a type would be.

= If one doesn't consider member pointers to be a worthy feature, it'= s unlikely one would see tweeking them as a worthy effort.

I have hopes that people who use bit fields, or wish they were mor= e usable, will like my library. =C2=A0 And want to see it made more clean w= ith tweeks to the Standard.

I would think others w= ould like my library because it helps provide grounds for depricating bit f= ields in the base language. =C2=A0But it's understandable they would no= t want to put it in the Standard or tweek the Standard to improve it. =C2= =A0The library has very high de facto portability, so putting it in the Sta= ndard would primarily serve to advertise it. =C2=A0It might open a floodgat= e to start putting (more) libraries in the Standard to advertise them.

--
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 https://groups.google.= com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/901ad0a5-1616-4873-80c9-92b34fd592b2= %40isocpp.org.
------=_Part_3085_1920672626.1467478884259-- ------=_Part_3084_2011059465.1467478884259-- .