Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Should the pick semantics be changed?
Should the pick semantics be changed? [message #42276] |
Tue, 04 March 2014 11:00  |
piotr5
Messages: 107 Registered: November 2005
|
Experienced Member |
|
|
c++11 introduced the r-value notion with "&&" after the type. this means that in namespace std picking is default only for those r-values, deep-copy otherwise. to force picking you have to use the function std::move(). this is quite the opposite to u++ where picking always is default and deep copy must be enforced. what about a redesign to make use of the way std containers handle picking? of course such a rewrite wouldn't work with non-c++11 compilers. as far as I remember at the beginning of u++ old compiler versions were not fully supported either, so it might be a good idea to start coding up some Core lib 2.0 and rewrite all applications...
needless to say, before we do that, first the u++ code parser needs to be made ready for parsing c++11 code, so Assist and documentation will work too...
also interesting for u++ is the suffix to strings, thereby allowing for automatically generated String objects and for applying translations with less bracket-usage. I guess many more improvements could be made if u++ would break backwards-compatibility and focus on the new c++11 features...
|
|
|
 |
|
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
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Tue Apr 29 16:08:49 CEST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00643 seconds
|