U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Status & Roadmap

Authors & License

Funding Ultimate++

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Should the pick semantics be changed?

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Return to the default flat view

Create a new topic

Submit Reply

Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? [message #42280 is a reply to message #42277]

Tue, 04 March 2014 23:14

piotr5 is currently offline

piotr5
Messages: 107
Registered: November 2005

Experienced Member

have you tried

struct Bar {
int foo;
Vector<int> bar;
Bar(Bar&&)=default;
};

?

Array<Ctrl> is imho a bad idea to make public, so you just need to define a pick-constructor and delete the copy-constructor. I think with the syntactic sugar of c++11 the original reasons for the current design of pick semantics are becoming obsolete.

with the suffix stuff I am referring to the operator""_suffix() syntax. to call that function you just write any literal and add _suffix at the end. of course you can replace _suffix by whatever name. (additionally there is the constexpr keyword to create objects at compile-time.) so I imagine instead of writing T_("text") next version of Core could also accept "text"_T to perform translations...

I experimented a bit with c++11 and I noticed the programming-style is quite different: std::array sounds more useful than the old c-style arrays, I keep using std algorithms more frequently because function-objects are easier to write, and most object-initialization I am doing with initializer-lists. but I cannot say for sure how this language will evolve. maybe someone will have a nice idea for new language-features by using the new stuff...

Report message to a moderator

Send a private message to this user

[Message index]

		Should the pick semantics be changed? By: piotr5 on Tue, 04 March 2014 11:00
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: mirek on Tue, 04 March 2014 12:12
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: piotr5 on Tue, 04 March 2014 23:14
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: mirek on Wed, 05 March 2014 08:54
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: piotr5 on Wed, 05 March 2014 10:27
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: mirek on Wed, 05 March 2014 12:02
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: mirek on Fri, 07 March 2014 09:00
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: piotr5 on Fri, 07 March 2014 16:23
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: mirek on Fri, 07 March 2014 16:44
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: mirek on Sun, 09 March 2014 09:34
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: piotr5 on Sun, 09 March 2014 13:28
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: Lance on Sun, 23 March 2014 22:02
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: piotr5 on Tue, 25 March 2014 19:35
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: Lance on Wed, 26 March 2014 02:37
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: Lance on Wed, 26 March 2014 02:48
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: piotr5 on Wed, 26 March 2014 10:35
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: mirek on Wed, 26 March 2014 11:38
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: Lance on Wed, 26 March 2014 21:25
		Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? By: Lance on Wed, 26 March 2014 21:21

Previous Topic:	D lang support
Next Topic:	[Compilation] Include .asm files in build

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

PDF

]

Current Time: Thu May 16 09:09:04 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02534 seconds