220 30272 article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "D. B." Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: std::array::size() be made static? Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 08:41:30 +0000 Lines: 72 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <5d432263-8011-4d53-ab33-916270e7f6e5@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114cc80c2b3af1054554de21 X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1483605695 30910 195.159.176.226 (5 Jan 2017 08:41:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 08:41:35 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCWNZ4ECS4GBBO4NXDBQKGQE6N65EVY@isocpp.org Thu Jan 05 09:41:30 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-wj0-f198.google.com ([209.85.210.198]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cP3bz-00076Z-79 for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 09:41:27 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-wj0-f198.google.com with SMTP id j10sf119417292wjb.3 for ; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:41:31 -0800 (PST) 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=OjaUwY390F0P8Vn3EtNpZq0VmXXwKR54A7fxQjLt6DI=; b=ikSka/OGnbd2kGv3dWGE/zwUTN30iRx6kUbzIrfm4HPhlLw0Pm9Ab5W51bdWZDj5Z4 8WbpPZXA5R1OgBkbsC60gQ2wQjsCoCpSn9G3KWCEffVV6PpnD63KL7mRiC4HR6SJNM0j y2F1dp1sPtc/LMrZEA4+K+4by1Ihr8DK+Yck6grKR4/DXW7O/GLsmfgWGJEQjXzNSlnb RlNEo6vpVWx1QRAD9yX3Glhhoy1gDwexRMViei9CEwOzcKbWOymQHSyTcP/LCv+g4Vp5 ytReP1WSRwRqHqO9PCFvQlnZloyhIsgHtsyan7fdh7lDyIqjfN56DIS/JUTXc9srdLVi M1cw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; 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=OjaUwY390F0P8Vn3EtNpZq0VmXXwKR54A7fxQjLt6DI=; b=Z3/DGUdt2v5ZGs+V6phL9xTtD5vWP3OJ75tyhJg6EK8Lbl70lcZLxbYVkKEdOpZXsP LUeQbvj6LahihN3SIUS4H/Xot/STp3q1+Uh2pQlYOroWwO2/K1mMbNLA/8E9pRLdTd0Z CYw5oOWJ7GQFM2zT8gwkDeFWDxiytI6r9crOexI//o1vT/cj52ZlmegRPqS4aKGDqZSu 9wHbON2y67hyQsczqwu0YrIrVNMtkLaXpB+nJTuMhG338cm0RJYtzTgXNaKWf/DlRxfJ tQBMCrEqBhkEQthI/O4+zDMgFuVUzQC4xpbGtOHoyflQm3PsOQa9+a2qMjx1RhOsvexz F1Og== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXLBqGvDccJ/k0iTZM3gDau5jsVoDdyaocoE1ldt3VadVwrIx+kaFYPPpH3++JtwIQ== X-Received: by 10.28.26.72 with SMTP id a69mr1742295wma.4.1483605691601; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:41:31 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.28.157.9 with SMTP id g9ls6433145wme.13.gmail; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:41:30 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.28.178.10 with SMTP id b10mr67407658wmf.83.1483605690885; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:41:30 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from mail-wm0-x231.google.com (mail-wm0-x231.google.com. [2a00:1450:400c:c09::231]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id yy3si1949743wjc.209.2017.01.05.00.41.30 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:41:30 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of db0451@gmail.com designates 2a00:1450:400c:c09::231 as permitted sender) client-ip=2a00:1450:400c:c09::231; Original-Received: by mail-wm0-x231.google.com with SMTP id k184so281904319wme.1 for ; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:41:30 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.28.168.12 with SMTP id r12mr46518332wme.16.1483605690495; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 00:41:30 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.28.144.66 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Jan 2017 00:41:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5d432263-8011-4d53-ab33-916270e7f6e5@isocpp.org> 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::231 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:30272 Archived-At: --001a114cc80c2b3af1054554de21 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Anthony Hall wrote: > (whether or not this is a good idea design-wise is another discussion) > I'm not sure it is. Whether it's a good idea design-wise correlates almost directly with whether there's a good reason to alter the design ot the language and make the size static, doesn't it? And IMO, it's not a good idea design-wise. And, by design std::array, has static size, so why shouldn't size() be > queryable at compile time even when an instance object is not available? > Mildly convincing, although tuple_size seems close enough for me, and if for some reason (that I cannot imagine) I did feel the need to inherit from std::array, I'd have no real issue with reimplementing the size() method or whatever my preferred method of exposing this info was, in terms of the base class. -- 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/CACGiwhHbb6JNBMEJ9xYBmsVPzf-kxiWiNpkW93Q5nqmp4oc%3D%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com. --001a114cc80c2b3af1054554de21 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On T= hu, Jan 5, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Anthony Hall <anthrond@gmail.com> wrote:
(whether or no= t this is a good idea design-wise is another discussion)
=

I'm not sure it is. Whether it's a good idea de= sign-wise correlates almost directly with whether there's a good reason= to alter the design ot the language and make the size static, doesn't = it? And IMO, it's not a good idea design-wise.
=C2=A0
=
And, by design std::array, ha= s static size, so why shouldn't size() be queryable at compile time eve= n when an instance object is not available?

Mildly convincing, although tuple_size seems close enough for me, an= d if for some reason (that I cannot imagine) I did feel the need to inherit= from std::array, I'd have no real issue with reimplementing the size()= method or whatever my preferred method of exposing this info was, in terms= of the base class.

--
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/CACGiwhHbb6JN= BMEJ9xYBmsVPzf-kxiWiNpkW93Q5nqmp4oc%3D%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.
--001a114cc80c2b3af1054554de21-- .