Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic difference between the expression creating a @struct@
object---Test(@\meta{args}@)@---and the
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic difference between the expression creating a @struct@
On 20-10-2009 6:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
I don't agree with this one.
There's extra cost involved, and the added keyword makes that clear.
Also, somebody mentioned using 'new' to allocate structs on
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:12:39 +0800, Lionello Lunesu
l...@lunesu.remove.com wrote:
On 20-10-2009 6:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
I don't agree with this one.
There's extra cost involved, and the added
Chris Nicholson-Sauls Wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic difference between the expression creating
Lionello Lunesu wrote:
On 20-10-2009 6:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
I don't agree with this one.
There's extra cost involved, and the added keyword makes that clear.
That's actually one problem: a
Max Samukha wrote:
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:12:39 +0800, Lionello Lunesu
l...@lunesu.remove.com wrote:
On 20-10-2009 6:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
I don't agree with this one.
There's extra cost involved,
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 19 de octubre a las 22:16 me escribiste:
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Jason House, el 19 de octubre a las 22:20 me escribiste:
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM,
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 19 de octubre a las 22:16 me escribiste:
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Jason House, el 19 de octubre a las 22:20 me escribiste:
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Mon,
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 20 de octubre a las 08:42 me escribiste:
Why not Scoped!T ? I think the purpose for this that the lifetime of the
object is bounded to the scope, right? I think is hard to figure that out
from InSitu!T than Scoped!T.
/useless discussion
It's not a useless
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Lionello Lunesu wrote:
Also, somebody mentioned using 'new' to allocate structs on the heap;
I've never actually done that, but it sounds like using 'new' would be
the perfect way to do just that.
Yah, I guess I'll drop it.
Consistency with structs demands that
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 19 de octubre a las 22:16 me escribiste:
No problem. You will be able to use InSitu!T. It is much better to
confine unsafe features to libraries instead of putting them in the
language.
{
auto foo =
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Max Samukha wrote:
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:12:39 +0800, Lionello Lunesu
l...@lunesu.remove.com wrote:
On 20-10-2009 6:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
I don't agree with this one.
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic difference between the expression creating a @struct@
object---Test(@\meta{args}@)@---and the expression creating a @class@
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 05:38:13PM -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
Didn't we go over this a few weeks ago? I think my preference would be
a bunch of templates in phobos that take new's job, and can also do
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:38:13 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic difference between the
Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:38:13 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic
On 20/10/2009 00:38, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic difference between the expression creating a @struct@
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
The syntactic difference between the expression creating a
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
*applause*
'X(x)' and 'new X(x)' have distinct meanings in C++. In Java/C#/D, the
'new' is just line noise.
--
Rainer Deyke - rain...@eldwood.com
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
*applause*
'X(x)' and 'new X(x)' have distinct meanings in C++. In Java/C#/D, the
'new' is just line
Bill Baxter wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
'X(x)' and 'new X(x)' have distinct meanings in C++. In Java/C#/D, the
'new' is just line noise.
Well, I think new Foo is how you create a struct on the heap in D.
So it's not exactly line noise.
I
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
*applause*
'X(x)' and 'new X(x)' have distinct meanings in C++. In
Jason House, el 19 de octubre a las 22:20 me escribiste:
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
*applause*
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:45:01 -0400, dsimcha dsim...@yahoo.com wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s
article
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct object. I wrote this:
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:45:01 -0400, dsimcha dsim...@yahoo.com wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s
article
I'm having a hard time justifying that you use
new X(args)
to create a class object, and
X(args)
to create a struct
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Jason House, el 19 de octubre a las 22:20 me escribiste:
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do
you guys think?
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Jason House, el 19 de octubre a las 22:20 me escribiste:
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I hereby
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:53:23 -0400, Brad Roberts bra...@puremagic.com
wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:45:01 -0400, dsimcha dsim...@yahoo.com wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s
article
I'm having a hard time justifying that you
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Andrei Alexandrescu (seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org)'s article
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Jason House, el 19 de octubre a las 22:20 me escribiste:
Bill Baxter Wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Rainer Deyke rain...@eldwood.com wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu
30 matches
Mail list logo
