Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Should the pick semantics be changed?
Re: Should the pick semantics be changed? [message #42588 is a reply to message #42579] Wed, 26 March 2014 02:37 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Lance is currently offline  Lance
Messages: 527
Registered: March 2007
Contributor
Sorry, can you demonstrate your original proposal with some code?

I mean just explain what you mean by
Quote:


well, to formalize a bit more concretely what I said, I believe return statement should at compile-time distinguish between return values local to the function which are not static, and all the return-values which remain in scope after the end of this function respectively could get into scope again (like static values or private members and such). and then based on this distinction the actual return-value should either be constructed with implicit cast to r-value or with the persistent const-l-value-reference constructor.



If I didn't get you wrong, there is really little the compiler can do, or it's already what is being done.
 
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Read Message
Previous Topic: D lang support
Next Topic: [Compilation] Include .asm files in build
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Tue May 14 18:30:56 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02258 seconds