220 27741 article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "D. B." Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Tuple syntax overhaul Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 10:04:56 +0100 Lines: 60 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <02ef4ab0-251d-4613-8f07-877855f9a86c@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1142c65678f3d90539b3f14a X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1470819909 31897 195.159.176.226 (10 Aug 2016 09:05:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 09:05:09 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCWNZ4ECS4GBBOW4VO6QKGQEOY3OAFI@isocpp.org Wed Aug 10 11:05:00 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-wm0-f72.google.com ([74.125.82.72]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bXPRa-00083F-Nv for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 11:04:58 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-wm0-f72.google.com with SMTP id o80sf52357082wme.1 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:59 -0700 (PDT) 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:from:date:message-id:subject:to :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=vcQfNfjv8bEIMZNHTKtucZBgGJ1DpzdIKaxp08lEaWk=; b=y4j1GxLb4Y/sHRkowzQfa1eWmphx3RBfWpBo3RkInzxv5E2UPnuBKIjFUfsO2awfH4 D2te+FCeGL4uBnUJE5UzCmuREmefCQsc3Ke1Ffl+ubrPW8WVjdG2Ir+/5EGelhGvQ57P 22mpvIQzYP8H8eQs62SIMS4/dUQW3b1oRRRAKAIwkuXo63C6ZJA5ZwEZlGNMx94LEsi0 +6Fj/peEmuHS8j3DV0bPkJKj904CaqvkXl4BuEIVN6d+387XA3L2fTvaXee4x5zGQTCZ KbNlgHqHoN6oTYBkmtkqDU+bGcJYA5r7GGU51yT/EGiojY+FCCC6OLNmy6yDhL0Yk4WE aO7A== 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:from:date :message-id:subject:to: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=vcQfNfjv8bEIMZNHTKtucZBgGJ1DpzdIKaxp08lEaWk=; b=OCh14hirRi77geYB4i5ZsbLCKEvyLRG8aKPa1thViHVwxMI4EIiCF1qt7Iz3IxuLB2 94qazEaekXt5rHbq5A05Ev1Tmt+Z8oOFmNXyYDMUaj8PWaQS1fMyzBSP8dJy8ISKCbOg SqEoY4IQk/Oeubpxo91PhH3wcr0To10KXY6RjfsLB32Ml3npP0GDg6oZVofdmjq4RP/v 5oxAGBCwmQwUDGu+8KPF0vzZJAoNeN09VuQy1hc9TrhIPL5WONbnGvQVMwj0TdJNosWH kfC4ZRisSmJp2LRC+gBnLdEqTeQz8Hu2Q45WHM0Acqrfr40d4tTK1sGR7/DwvRS7BFt5 3Zjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AEkoouu7kZ1BkqH0m/jDeJ11Dh673rsxma/9ZMMETxU41pvSom9Kpy7BgFmg2B9ghkRMMQ== X-Received: by 10.28.54.215 with SMTP id y84mr279349wmh.6.1470819899194; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:59 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.28.25.129 with SMTP id 123ls1174403wmz.21.canary; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.28.0.203 with SMTP id 194mr2143223wma.29.1470819898127; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:58 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u2si38849861wji.139.2016.08.10.02.04.58 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:58 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of db0451@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c09::235 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c09::235; Original-Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id i5so89081355wmg.0 for ; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.28.36.10 with SMTP id k10mr1951244wmk.33.1470819896715; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.28.15.15 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Aug 2016 02:04:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: db0451@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of db0451@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c09::235 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=db0451@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-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:27741 Archived-At: --001a1142c65678f3d90539b3f14a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 ....that sounded a bit self-contradictory. What I meant by not adding core-language features was to keep std::tuple as a template class, rather than making it into a 1st-class type. The only new language features would be shortcut syntaxes that would invoke appropriate operations on std::tuple, like we already have for initializer_list and with range-for. So that's a lot less intrusive to the core language than the idea of making tuple a 1st-class type. What might be useful is if you show an example of code that is currently highly unwieldy with tuples, tell us what the problem is, and show how your proposal - which would probably need changes to the chosen punctuation etc - would solve it. As it is, I'm finding it hard to see enough of a problem to make changes to the language, but then I probably just don't use tuples as much as other people, so it's possible I'm missing the point. -- 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/CACGiwhGrH8OCHN-6J3WKPLvtPjd8kuP-ywuE%3DSBBrTLExthrLA%40mail.gmail.com. --001a1142c65678f3d90539b3f14a Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
...that sounded a bit self-contradictory. What I mean= t by not adding core-language features was to keep std::tuple as a template= class, rather than making it into a 1st-class type. The only new language = features would be shortcut syntaxes that would invoke appropriate operation= s on std::tuple, like we already have for initializer_list and with range-f= or. So that's a lot less intrusive to the core language than the idea o= f making tuple a 1st-class type.

What might be useful is if yo= u show an example of code that is currently highly unwieldy with tuples, te= ll us what the problem is, and show how your proposal - which would probabl= y need changes to the chosen punctuation etc - would solve it. As it is, I&= #39;m finding it hard to see enough of a problem to make changes to the lan= guage, but then I probably just don't use tuples as much as other peopl= e, so it's possible I'm missing the point.

--
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/CACGiwhGrH8OCHN= -6J3WKPLvtPjd8kuP-ywuE%3DSBBrTLExthrLA%40mail.gmail.com.
--001a1142c65678f3d90539b3f14a-- .