Re: [Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

[Oswald Buddenhagen]

On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 10:29:09PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote:
> On Friday 04 December 2015 19:06:51 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > it's not that anyone is confused, it's that your "aside" was
> > inherently flawed: variables in python are dynamically typed, so the
> > suggestion that they are "auto" in any way related to c++ makes no
> > sense whatsoever. my response aimed merely at showing that even your
> > little "joke" was off.
> 
> Again: I was referring to the omission of any form of type name when
> declaring variables. That Python is _also_ dynamically typed is
> correct, but irrelevant. 
>
then maybe you want to explain how you want to implement auto
*everywhere* without going dynamic. until you provide a credible answer
to that, your "aside" is patently irrelevant. hint: c# type inference
does *not* provide that answer.
_______________________________________________
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development