220 27554 <040024a5-3390-4613-afef-a4a8aea0ca8c@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: gmisocpp@gmail.com Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: this in non-member functions Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 04:45:39 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 95 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <040024a5-3390-4613-afef-a4a8aea0ca8c@isocpp.org> References: <997FEFE7601FB061.02d36407-64db-41ec-a64b-eabcdd0bd9c8@mail.outlook.com> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_6961_1921104750.1470224739954" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1470224751 25970 195.159.176.226 (3 Aug 2016 11:45:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 11:45:51 +0000 (UTC) To: ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCM3TRNUXUDBBZFSQ66QKGQEFHEACCY@isocpp.org Wed Aug 03 13:45:45 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-pf0-f200.google.com ([209.85.192.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bUucJ-000655-Pd for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:45:44 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-pf0-f200.google.com with SMTP id 63sf393512193pfx.0 for ; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 04:45:43 -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=9wdJrvpQ8LLZqPlMjAzPJOm40G/LIT9Z3WMAz/AFpNM=; b=HNlmSBzpOUAb4ygFnmE3MAKXKhhcZG53ODswSQKqaPR+Tv/q6r6KEHooI7MjPuvsSJ tidigdIpy+1YwLeXi18dhBjwqNnbJUi9ZyGE2Fa93C/mDhHDK/O0zfWkc8N/682/wAhA WD9Emuexv2uQwd13SfgtuEsYtsmI2hsMCL7lUPdWIPVg7pCagfbGmPNCEEQRhSE7wUjY XV7pcuUBZO73HH5Q90+ICyx7vtuTtAbUFTFUV1g8uBGCKZo7eRxwy1uJMCYD5weUJ83z 7PDyFjUo2RbnclmwAsrfpF4BnSM2c3DuIdDaXBZcuDRr89V54T8a37KQRlFwfzXGnAM/ sK1w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; 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=9wdJrvpQ8LLZqPlMjAzPJOm40G/LIT9Z3WMAz/AFpNM=; b=yNY2xs91cYsvi0mFBHCVujquos+OMJRZ8FD+rL1Etj6r9otN13Il3da0Hz8i3FzQ4P Cf2iEze9I6oExiWr2t5vpljD5jKZKGMzHENoViq4x0G/LVABhpPqIKGtlfkvTb2Y83Vg U4bA0Zth648PlXHxJyRv6uoxnnHori6ZBm3uPHgxiBvN0FvoKMNv//hXrGP5a0NInjRn kUf7wQvZ/ISKSKhd+nSpl+IwrUh6dx109z6tmiK1Tv4K9nnpSxVjbmrIEXUSjmZBMgxR Dtr3qZgUTbe9izryL5QNC+DSR1YL3M1kZYgTktck4j6FvrvlHb5Qs2Eyz8Mf2OCx8a5P pCKg== 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=9wdJrvpQ8LLZqPlMjAzPJOm40G/LIT9Z3WMAz/AFpNM=; b=KpuoHENzhOC2gyv+VWLNk+s0+UlET/uPf1FwtYm7c3P1kfZxBxv+KHAF1Yqvhip3pg VrOHAYIp6VYdcJLbapTLmNdepLQS9WM3K+lE+4jZlw0pIdhglkJ6s/SlGiVIOK3/rGbT C8SCAyVFxe9vBMUB/jsk77kUfUHgwAoIxVCTP8MfRZ6g8F47tR1H+cywaHg0Thv9vqGt lqA+Ha2KESVPVhNw55aEYSAhga12NFKZPNBbnCR4lk1oqoLJNI+/t9GSg4Q6fiufQDBj 34YqJQUADpWo2KOWLW278EqP2DsG/k95s4n0qhE+lOwGUxImWWiX10dt9qyfTpuJnU/s dQIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkooutlxzgy7naN+rzEBxTOrqrxFGK4OFGgjVxzerjo+Lar4T8kQgeVXpu4sXvFQv0SVg== X-Received: by 10.66.154.165 with SMTP id vp5mr58211484pab.44.1470224743278; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 04:45:43 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.107.46.232 with SMTP id u101ls484094iou.47.gmail; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 04:45:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.227.207 with SMTP id d198mr2525197ith.4.1470224740597; Wed, 03 Aug 2016 04:45:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: gmisocpp@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:27554 Archived-At: ------=_Part_6961_1921104750.1470224739954 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_6962_1408277784.1470224739954" ------=_Part_6962_1408277784.1470224739954 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 11:01:29 PM UTC+12, Viacheslav Usov wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:55 PM, > wrote: > > > I think if the Uniform Call Syntax proposal is eventually accepted, > there will no need for this feature anymore > That was my thought too. > I do not see why. Can you explain? > > Cheers, > V. > So taking your example: Struct A { int x; }; void foo(A *this) { x = 1; } I thought that with UFCS, this would be allowed: A a; a.foo(); resulting in foo(A* a) being called and a->x = 1 would perform the same action as your example. If that's wrong or missing the point, what's your proposal about or aiming at compared to UFC? -- 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/040024a5-3390-4613-afef-a4a8aea0ca8c%40isocpp.org. ------=_Part_6962_1408277784.1470224739954 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wednesday, August 3, 2016 at 11:01:29 PM UTC+12= , Viacheslav Usov wrote:
=
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 12:55 PM, <jspha...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think if the Uniform Call Synt= ax proposal is eventually accepted, there will no need for this feature any= more

That was my thought = too.


I do not s= ee why. Can you explain?

Cheers,
V.

So taking your example:
Struct= A { int x; };
void foo(A *this) { x =3D 1; }
I thought that = with UFCS, this would be allowed:
A a;
a.foo();
resu= lting in foo(A* a) being called
and a->x =3D 1 would perform the same= action=C2=A0as your example.

If that's wrong = or missing the point, what's your proposal about or aiming at compared = to UFC?
=C2=A0=C2=A0

--
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/040024a5-3390-4613-afef-a4a8aea0ca8c= %40isocpp.org.
------=_Part_6962_1408277784.1470224739954-- ------=_Part_6961_1921104750.1470224739954-- .