220 39370 <363df3db-b747-449f-b95d-81d15b6c3842@isocpp.org> article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Nicol Bolas Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Alternative proposal for mapping P0709 Deterministic Exceptions into C Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:36:01 -0700 (PDT) Lines: 75 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <363df3db-b747-449f-b95d-81d15b6c3842@isocpp.org> References: <6a65c934-5d2a-4e75-b88d-9eaaee338bd3@isocpp.org> <1c229827-6d5d-45bd-8766-c3af818b2b0b@isocpp.org> <4ac80882-16fc-4ab4-9a12-64da1ef0e974@isocpp.org> <8866881c-ef1d-4c37-9242-5b1d3327c288@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_Part_9408_1967338886.1532457361992" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1532457239 17062 195.159.176.226 (24 Jul 2018 18:33:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 18:33:59 +0000 (UTC) To: ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCEKFTV6ZUMBBEXD3XNAKGQEC3LTSYI@isocpp.org Tue Jul 24 20:33:55 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-yw0-f200.google.com ([209.85.161.200]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fi288-0004I9-Px for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 20:33:52 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-yw0-f200.google.com with SMTP id z200-v6sf2698967ywd.22 for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:36:03 -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 :list-post:list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=E31ZhD6JD9sAWlIS/K01LB5FQRjl6/k43MjU8o/4Riw=; b=HIxLr1w+xohMj5+xJkGtCgdz7h/Tp7UHj1eydu9FtpacNe1qt60dvzt/Ode9NNoSR/ LsLbmdxqaztV2zWP+40Zu+7I+X1HZRoOYBEEdaq51FimPPlfj+RibV5DNRBfo/cqYTFr b6BqLwMgS3HR/h1UjfhqAyQ4ajKu1Kk0bQyVCUxl/TO8ZyJOU52cGE/z7gfp0OCMLz4X MN6UtNnNH/jln2kfB6x7gJgVYvjP4pe/eDQ7tfTD0c0rUxAXWL0sjjqCubGg7KNuZ3e9 DnhyWD86amPlY/CzoQjQhXFOAJatpXXpspnkKSw8D0NIQ5gmVE+uCIAA/QzNpfxtOSwg x0Eg== 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=E31ZhD6JD9sAWlIS/K01LB5FQRjl6/k43MjU8o/4Riw=; b=CMHnl4nu+TVdP7JRpwkV7t6qU7UrDwhNMMWl00nRp6hw+OISktAC+4Im8xCODNRuxh MdwP+YlanalKd9XgfBB0pXc8m3G6VK9tBgh6gQ/vOVptl8MyCwV6PvXyiZLRDRIMziZ3 YTCOwm1ax/OMqc1hzb36fWkmQXCs86mg+SCEicLakR+23YW2OWUOdml3KCKkTdvFaBu7 dl0mW8esLrYU14GAcMQwwMowXpYPaZCWQ+TEzaMVCwOPtyVoHC99uqyX1XsTafP5NHzL YgKoqy0DvGX68RdRScjGWgs2xjdH8DIRkrYGHOkOZTe1dTaFlkAsmp7vN1+Mj6F2cRYb YoPQ== 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=E31ZhD6JD9sAWlIS/K01LB5FQRjl6/k43MjU8o/4Riw=; b=iFH9UuPYC0GShnm7Z6zmlCerUzuXraEh0PauoiPbTkDs5/l8o0/Fg6nus/oaopu4jn Yys1/5PRWf1RmI+m/BDrXeOMu2FwdHQfYZBJ5nSopR7yM8sWyAy+w8h22nuYDowHN4IU 0qygbq+Wo40yCPmZ5loBT57cyoBrLZQMXBai4AAZT0VNnTs3MlJ+geg7KixYzYkYmTsT egW+8L13J8nsdAFWij/ec548kpoHLK4FWY4xOGNnbsVuEkp3v9ToDCJsxdxbB2DCpyNO 71/32wfbrYNeR1wTPwDJUaV2p/JUgzJF0FgU6CEbi3sd/d3P1NJ1SlVUKQhDbXYPDaCE YMDg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGSwNIdmqFW8izZyhrRLjVXQtdvnafdWQOMdxJNw2Moa5hhXttj 0EtdOsLNXU1qYY/fgrRYIuiAuw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpfTv8cwB7UmlzYgd+2XcLRFiTlRxdjVXyOitKcT/3VHq+1hCYNgTOuwUmn914Mtnv0tR9joqA== X-Received: by 2002:a81:b88:: with SMTP id 130-v6mr5809395ywl.190.1532457363332; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:36:03 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 2002:a25:6d44:: with SMTP id i65-v6ls2741700ybc.8.gmail; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:36:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a25:5f4a:: with SMTP id h10-v6mr321395ybm.5.1532457362445; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:36:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Original-Sender: jmckesson@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:39370 Archived-At: ------=_Part_9408_1967338886.1532457361992 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_9409_308190184.1532457361992" ------=_Part_9409_308190184.1532457361992 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 1:52:21 PM UTC-4, Niall Douglas wrote: > > Well, that leaves me with egg on my face. The proposal certainly makes >>> more sense given what you've said. On a similar note, then, what would this >>> do to our constexpr? >>> >> >> It's a C proposal; it doesn't interact with `constexpr`. Indeed, one of >> its biggest flaws is that it doesn't allow for inter-operation with C++ >> static exceptions at all, despite being in part based on the same principle. >> > > My _Fails() proposal does however work in constexpr, > `_Fails()` is not valid C++, and `constexpr` is not valid C. How can they work with one another? Unless you're proposing to add `_Fails()` to C++, which I think would be a rather hard sell. -- 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/363df3db-b747-449f-b95d-81d15b6c3842%40isocpp.org. ------=_Part_9409_308190184.1532457361992 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 1:52:21 PM UTC-4, Niall Dougl= as wrote:
Well, that leaves me = with egg on my face. The proposal certainly makes more sense given what you= 've said. On a similar note, then, what would this do to our constexpr?=

It's a C proposal; it does= n't interact with `constexpr`. Indeed, one of its biggest flaws is that= it doesn't allow for inter-operation with C++ static exceptions at all= , despite being in part based on the same principle.

My _Fails() proposal does however work in constex= pr,

`_Fails()` is not valid C++= , and `constexpr` is not valid C. How can they work with one another? Unles= s you're proposing to add `_Fails()` to C++, which I think would be a r= ather hard sell.

--
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/363df3db-b747-449f-b95d-81d15b6c3842= %40isocpp.org.
------=_Part_9409_308190184.1532457361992-- ------=_Part_9408_1967338886.1532457361992-- .