220 35837 <250bd144-e016-4c31-bba8-0e3e8a8cb6ce@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: odomobo@gmail.com Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Output parameters Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2017 18:30:47 -0800 (PST) Lines: 67 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <250bd144-e016-4c31-bba8-0e3e8a8cb6ce@isocpp.org> References: <1c1bb50b-2d59-4247-a158-158065fb1a9a@isocpp.org> <0c471d5c-b9b2-40f9-a2bf-908edbb1f272@isocpp.org> <17e3b13c-eb1b-fc2c-590e-3d394f164f9a@wanadoo.fr> <1c8e3ec4-6c5f-43db-bb6e-131d725f7ba4@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_2769_1669322011.1512873047256" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1512873047 9618 195.159.176.226 (10 Dec 2017 02:30:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2017 02:30:47 +0000 (UTC) To: ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCIJNUOTWIOBBWFYWLIQKGQEW2IZA3A@isocpp.org Sun Dec 10 03:30:43 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-vk0-f71.google.com ([209.85.213.71]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eNrO7-0002JO-2t for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Dec 2017 03:30:43 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-vk0-f71.google.com with SMTP id d134sf7842454vke.9 for ; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 18:30:49 -0800 (PST) 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 :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=qewU4WJTs5tjOu21fnkHheHf0T3Faiv8QGQuD07KNzM=; b=CvHR9nGb+ATSq2hK+BvYk0SiuZsTlCIqPwxYdIggvc1Q2OzFgFxNG2d4P06cGdStgH Xeihnv2EzIiEWNQ0gZCzpqnl1GBHeiqEfhlOO2JBZUQFqlTwoTUFtwnZjz5J0dsF2DTV 4W1GEHHFK6xpPRi4DCYr1lV5+6qEOkvZRO+RE49nrKcoxBn+JPB0mskPGM+wNSIDG2g8 ++r75LsScIlKLGRr2WL6AUyuumWgqsKEqf2SXpAX5OBNREOMmDtlIgS9XsnGILYMKeKD vOQm9YoaqfuE2D7w/lT/lPLx8Tf3pLmoZC6eLRc1CN62SPsELzSdKuWb0sGgPYbPlQD7 HSFw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject:mime-version :x-original-sender:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=qewU4WJTs5tjOu21fnkHheHf0T3Faiv8QGQuD07KNzM=; b=Tjy9GqTzmVD7r+flEOKefOt/QQo5THAPt3nmjCM43qd98pkTDutXJEUYCKRpoDfGVD srdH1FE4oeh7IqzHBUF/E1CCcyzDrW2RD89a/ybC0WuhXGhCxElqxpT724Ve9aKWCtoP d4cO5D78sJjYUnqLlJfD0xS0h/Af6zrMXNbZiPhh6emqIdi6iSDo/sztfRx2c2Rpetde sJytzt1yCqesEAJynDwRaDx49Stp1eWRIlueEsL1zNZSYFBFQM9Tbde5wPNh8H7zN5Ca 09SoB3IxNG+YNMhnT2U1lI5t4cqonenhraEXRm5Me4CscUQK+2ktvONeFF15B5GVlLtt 9GWw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; 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=qewU4WJTs5tjOu21fnkHheHf0T3Faiv8QGQuD07KNzM=; b=tblalpAnVRV69hfpmlgSaUk83ZZWMBQtiIlOFG6/g4mtdloncE8VQHdoPPXJOYj5o5 YW3Ko4qE9rR05LFnDGeNZDmHM+Wyn7cSFUb/kmgnfUQq4FwkkvTRDt7gqOD3BpyjbbGU GER0gL+fwNTJOVlx3nN/Umw7iquhU0Ofuqtyt7FOvUrPMrlCVgRnaF6LuQU5si/GwKXU 5xzCxuR8xgUKqHoDoV6jCW7MnciRjFfKBbX1cO1Cz0mMi3cD7Sm+OhJGK7aaKwws8uXu sLIXD1y257Z71sOxRWIv8jIpKOIOgsLIfE/zavDY424iwhDON8NZfODU9k8/sLTGfqG9 A3FA== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mIGlfgpGzuRnaBUPSSACnSp47JLqjo4JYxotVqQPQUFrxwB9IUg 2NhahQSVbOYmcnKVgjKEDMbteA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBostswmeuo6lS151az1GZ3PMilRwYNcESy/uQFj3OFPy3e++53fSDegdJs8WRrDByXKtXCjilg== X-Received: by 10.31.84.1 with SMTP id i1mr1943001vkb.86.1512873049338; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 18:30:49 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.159.45.129 with SMTP id v1ls1614889uaj.18.gmail; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 18:30:47 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.31.94.198 with SMTP id s189mr1704646vkb.9.1512873047793; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 18:30:47 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: odomobo@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:35837 Archived-At: ------=_Part_2769_1669322011.1512873047256 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_2770_1965880271.1512873047256" ------=_Part_2770_1965880271.1512873047256 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Saturday, December 9, 2017 at 7:11:11 PM UTC-6, Brittany Friedman wrote: > > I agree that #2 is the right solution. One change that might make #2 more > palatable would be to allow structs to be declared as part of a function's > return type. MSVC seems to accept this code but I don't think it is > conforming. > > struct { int mean; int median; int mode; } calc_averages(vector); > I like that syntax, but according to [dcl.fct]/9 it shouldn't be allowed. I wonder why this is expressly disallowed -- it seems like an optimal solution to this kind of an issue, assuming a named struct wasn't appropriate. -- 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/250bd144-e016-4c31-bba8-0e3e8a8cb6ce%40isocpp.org. ------=_Part_2770_1965880271.1512873047256 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Saturday, December 9, 2017 at 7:11:11 PM UTC-6,= Brittany Friedman wrote:
I agree that #2 is the right solution. One change that might ma= ke #2 more palatable would be to allow structs to be declared as part of a = function's return type. MSVC seems to accept this code but I don't = think it is conforming.

struct { int mean; int median; i= nt mode; } calc_averages(vector<int>);
<= br>
I like that syntax, but according to [dcl.fct]/9 it shouldn&#= 39;t be allowed. I wonder why this is expressly disallowed -- it seems like= an optimal solution to this kind of an issue, assuming a named struct wasn= 't appropriate.

--
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/250bd144-e016-4c31-bba8-0e3e8a8cb6ce= %40isocpp.org.
------=_Part_2770_1965880271.1512873047256-- ------=_Part_2769_1669322011.1512873047256-- .