220 26909 article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Faisal Vali Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Better name for std::launder() ? Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:41:18 -0500 Lines: 73 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <1cd5895f-df27-9cda-73cf-cbc2f1488a2c@f2.dion.ne.jp> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1468438919 23134 80.91.229.3 (13 Jul 2016 19:41:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:41:59 +0000 (UTC) To: "" Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDDKRIXX5YARB7FSTK6AKGQE426WPRA@isocpp.org Wed Jul 13 21:41:54 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-io0-f199.google.com ([209.85.223.199]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bNQ2b-0006y0-2f for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 21:41:53 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-io0-f199.google.com with SMTP id u25sf113639171ioi.1 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isocpp-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=JRxUm+C+bwFTXOByONM1vYjuWgwEBr53bU22OE/aAhw=; b=S+lUIyP0BEUpLW1OA1DLiVwZf3wof8cJUzJAsgMBU18D7akhBFyvnovWkBrddFAJbH 1KzTD5T2+mY1Ww3AcR1mUzr+qK6h9siY2uxDDPIw6U3qqpF0U/nBmPcqnXozNjFLEgEJ 3Rjb1459oJMaBXK/GP1z1vsZj11imxyF/gFva4SjcBv9YD82HdA1/sDGzlLQdaLWSA/n M7lADI5LITJYhLE+ww1LiTwSmPvNa61KGOTTOeuT19q6BwEclefwkKNy0tIVwR4rK6rf SpxZ9MfTpn/H814I63g/y5T7y57BbdWI2WI4jjV56Q6Qi3kTsEiIg//6m2OvFHdWkMBo ksHQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=JRxUm+C+bwFTXOByONM1vYjuWgwEBr53bU22OE/aAhw=; b=c06A3kL1KfdAPxOJLMDpgFLyCECn6TM/K3xpSDLGoEzsMIEFKItf/yv+n4g+6npAz1 xjM7qVKRGOxOXmg3Q7nFrfd6sDDYzjJI+f3kcoesmw6EP4nKwgoAz6iy9xYvCD3ip9Ve RoDRxB256EQnRnXySMN7M4lXglj+hXz9q8z6itZSZ1TTClLXaeUFu1cIOeIwLVnhaf3P PmJTuZqag8gH9K3tF/0G/I5TIBU3b88vNIgPr8tAO3nt1ywn+C3Pj8iCFDQUZteDfHkA DThDGTxkyFxNH/APMkDf8/0sh/1I6bnRXQAn8G+yF89wx22EioEM7iWToZvVe0xFSiKC /QFw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJo06J/1hMfL+5lrM8QsKNAzq8qQ/+TT/s8Yo8HYZyAh/3SndnWM038bjCiSnfqvQ== X-Received: by 10.107.131.233 with SMTP id n102mr8270931ioi.16.1468438912050; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:52 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.36.89.20 with SMTP id p20ls30033itb.13.gmail; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.192.8 with SMTP id u8mr24178903itf.77.1468438907873; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:47 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-it0-x229.google.com (mail-it0-x229.google.com. [2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id l3si18842257itg.106.2016.07.13.12.41.47 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:47 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of faisalv@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229 as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229; Original-Received: by mail-it0-x229.google.com with SMTP id u186so29979377ita.0 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.139.67 with SMTP id g64mr10739343ite.75.1468438907476; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:47 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.50.229.33 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:41:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: faisalv@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of faisalv@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=faisalv@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:26909 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Richard Smith wrote: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:24 AM, Kazutoshi Satoda > wrote: >> >> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2015/p0137r0.html >> (accepted for C++17) >> >> The name std::launder() seems cryptic. There is no hint in the word >> "launder" to show it is about the C++ object model, lifetime, and >> reusing storage. The situation is likely same even if a programmer >> preliminarily knows about the issues it solves. Comments like "Here, >> compilers should suppose new object at reused storage" will be wanted >> each time it is used. >> Not that I feel strongly about this at all, but your point is not unreasonable - launder could be named such that it is even more suggestive (or perhaps less ambiguous - launder has many connotations - although all of them seem appropriate here depending on your lens). Would you prefer something along the lines of std::revived/resurrected/renewed_object ? Or std::phoenix? ;) >> On the other hand, assuming its rare uses, usually in libraries, a long >> name won't be so much problem. Thus, I think a longer and descriptive >> name is more appropriate. As a bonus, it will be more usable as a search >> key to find relevant articles about it. >> >> It could be std::suppose_new_at_reused_storage(), as a strawman. The >> example at [ptr.launder] would look like this: >> >> struct X { const int n; }; >> X *p = new X{3}; >> const int a = p->n; >> new (p) X{5}; // p does not point to new object (3.8) >> // because X::n is const >> const int b = p->n; // undefined behavior >> const int c = std::suppose_new_at_reused_storage(p)->n; // OK >> >> >> What do you think? Is it too late? > > > If you file a national body comment on the CD ballot suggesting renaming it, > along with a proposed new name and rationale, it's not too late for the > committee to consider a different name. > >> Does someone know the history of the naming? > > > The current name was originally suggested as -- essentially -- a placeholder > name, albeit a plausible one, and seems to have broadly been considered good > enough to not require changing. LEWG review discussed the name and decided > unanimously that they were fine with it as-is. CWG review also discussed the > name briefly and did not propose changing it. > > -- > 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/CAOfiQq%3D4m1yiHj2J4fFBdEVwGyS2eMY7-buNRmDdMzyx3QuYag%40mail.gmail.com. -- 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/CABsSThp20QA9Pogo06TM_h2mVMgBgk71-VPU76DR-ai_hjb2Gg%40mail.gmail.com. .