220 26802 <69414d97-dbaf-4ba4-b8fa-17bc5279b402@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Greg Marr Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: `pure` virt-specifier-seq to denote pure virtual functions. Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:53:32 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 87 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <69414d97-dbaf-4ba4-b8fa-17bc5279b402@isocpp.org> References: <4b8b5bd1-d8e2-4f70-bb83-96cc3dd519a9@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_315_1813374239.1468292012186" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1468292017 14014 80.91.229.3 (12 Jul 2016 02:53:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 02:53:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ezmagician@gmail.com To: ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDEZH3XFPIIKZN4RXQCRUBFV5LUHM@isocpp.org Tue Jul 12 04:53:35 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-it0-f72.google.com ([209.85.214.72]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bMnpG-0002hJ-Ig for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 04:53:34 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-it0-f72.google.com with SMTP id u186sf10857351ita.0 for ; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:53:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isocpp-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc: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=P2spJx1Nx9c2Yz9neoikZkYZbQHWE+SKpgGSqoWDytk=; b=h6ZpJBPw5TSdC97la8ufMwHO3RmfWUPP0pmgv8yCWd6cepgkOWHM6dORzUBV3FcL5s 6IQcbMXCeuqB5o7dieiFOyELXwYvdjLYRhvAhWaikRzTXCoj2F6L0p4TozYNxDv5D0OX 69gVvcgzyuj4uWHXCM7xaO92bbKUPdjUP4zr+1cWHZmrxWF5rViT1FXRk5lixlRuMePd pNwqzdB1wl/4uy4DPnid9MBZE4Geifqb2uMAZz90RjG7QzUpHGjfdOduYqT9VwQMBEp8 a6q6//mLgI+MuuOo2CfloilrgLWQvA/2Bu0j5ZNHsYKM/uLKaglgNcp1ddF90JzJR+TF Uzlg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc: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=P2spJx1Nx9c2Yz9neoikZkYZbQHWE+SKpgGSqoWDytk=; b=FQo3oVu3wmGax0PStE30UlMpp/exeGy8bJC//sIqgDyKAhem1WjVG+Wtr9XvieoFrb yynNUC6cXTF5YqiID9ELSvKpBCUle3UaqOzThzUYYc2XnMtvNqW9raO4DPWB87edwZnM wYtZ/du4u8GqG48ECitl80MY3SKGgyeGfkfU5XxMGd5ImqpKk/qXM4+skQBD3YPpkQ59 J3iCVmq23z7zUgDWZEGofLzWn5MBMUYHxTc7dpptk9Y6jmjhgxc0TdKcyB1z9sNfG0fS eoIdcCvjio/auvhIRbac26VcD5CVF+fCUiPTl5SsPn+z4I4DSmFJeES65ONE8yNRbcEz 2iwg== 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:cc: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=P2spJx1Nx9c2Yz9neoikZkYZbQHWE+SKpgGSqoWDytk=; b=PeCwnz8nYs6eM2UXm8DlOLbpkSHL77n5eo9/yEERO132sGVRCMWJQeq+FqrCXQasEc EEjd73GtokG5DfVMqll4Ae7+MgA73JWkYtcc+iLLd30PQsTj29RGIXzsRpnpWLuHq2Oj 1gzs8gPG5ik4njTMC8AMV5rgRMyyhMd3EYhwB0Zo/vMkfX31ZLke2nnYpd7Hk8em3EwC nr/i12zoR+1/j51AJndoB45drUtrwcz9ZjOiLwiW/TNhbjoBn86KmJTAGZbN3+xLVMqW iQm6fl9kkthQsT7YZ+QPkthAnKEq1J7r+hKMhwIsU9zfd9dL9gmBL8SghKELoX22RzlB v4RQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIiR/l3FLb5raYAFF8fOBmPUrS/Om5g2zTufVid2qDOhjMFniacFd7MR7c1vye6vg== X-Received: by 10.157.58.55 with SMTP id j52mr20262409otc.4.1468292013534; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:53:33 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.107.18.224 with SMTP id 93ls5504ios.19.gmail; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:53:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.230.194 with SMTP id e185mr489384ith.9.1468292012700; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:53:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4b8b5bd1-d8e2-4f70-bb83-96cc3dd519a9@isocpp.org> X-Original-Sender: gregmmarr@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:26802 Archived-At: ------=_Part_315_1813374239.1468292012186 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_316_1056714144.1468292012187" ------=_Part_316_1056714144.1468292012187 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 These are the parts of that thread that I think are most important: Matt Calabrese I do not see sufficient motivation for this change. 0 in this context is symbolic and pretty reasonable, in my opinion. Using "abstract" instead of 0 doesn't solve any practical problems ... . As far as I can tell, what you describe is purely just an additional syntax for something that can already be done in the language, and this syntax does not provide tangible benefit. I personally do not agree that it is more clear, either, though it certainly is more verbose, and I have doubts that it is at all easier to teach. In either way, someone has to learn that "= 0" or "= abstract" means that it's a pure virtual function, and I don't see why one would say that either one of those options is strictly better. The harder part when learning is understanding what a pure virtual function *is* as opposed to the specific spelling of "pure virtual." Ville Voutilainen Also, adding a second syntax to do the exact same thing as another syntax increases the knowledge needed for code readers to understand C++. -- 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/69414d97-dbaf-4ba4-b8fa-17bc5279b402%40isocpp.org. ------=_Part_316_1056714144.1468292012187 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
These are the parts of that thread that I think are most i= mportant:=C2=A0

Matt Cal= abrese=C2=A0
I do not see = sufficient motivation for this change. 0 in this context is symbolic and pr= etty reasonable, in my opinion. Using "abstract" instead of 0 doe= sn't solve any practical problems ... . As far as I can tell, what you = describe is purely just an additional syntax for something that can already= be done in the language, and this syntax does not provide tangible benefit= .. I personally do not agree that it is more clear, either, though it certai= nly is more verbose, and I have doubts that it is at all easier to teach. I= n either way, someone has to learn that "=3D 0" or "=3D abst= ract" means that it's a pure virtual function, and I don't see= why one would say that either one of those options is strictly better. The= harder part when learning is understanding what a pure virtual function *i= s* as opposed to the specific spelling of "pure virtual."
Ville Vou= tilainen
Also, ad= ding a second syntax to do the exact same thing as another syntax increases= the knowledge needed for code readers to understand C++.
=


--
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/69414d97-dbaf-4ba4-b8fa-17bc5279b402= %40isocpp.org.
------=_Part_316_1056714144.1468292012187-- ------=_Part_315_1813374239.1468292012186-- .