On Wednesday, 27 November 2013 at 10:16:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, November 27, 2013 10:57:42 Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On 27/11/13 10:45, bearophile wrote:
> It's useless code, you can't have ref variadic, sorry.
Ack. :-( I just tried it out myself and found the same thing.
Personally, I think that it's by far the best approach to just
do
int foo(int i)
{
int j;
return foo(i, j);
}
It's clean, and I really don't see a big problem with it. But
if you _really_
don't want to do that, you can always create a dummy variable
and do something
like
int dummy;
int foo(int i, out int j = dummy)
{
...
}
But I'd advise against it, since it strikes me as rather messy,
and I really
don't see any problem with just creating a wrapper function.
It's the kind of
thing that you already have to pretty much any time that you
try and have a
function accept const ref for an efficiency boost, since ref
doesn't accept
rvalues. A bit annoying perhaps, but not a big deal.
- Jonathan M Davis
Interesting trick. That said, doing this (should) also mean you
can't use foo in a pure context, since it means the caller needs
to access the global dummy (although that seems to work right
now).
