On Mon, 08 Jun 2015 13:38:08 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:

> On 06/08/2015 09:30 AM, ketmar wrote:
>> On Sun, 07 Jun 2015 18:50:07 +0200, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/06/2015 08:10 AM, ketmar wrote:
>>>> if `auto` can play a role of type placeholder
>>>
>>> There is no such thing as a type placeholder.
>>
>> there is:
>>
>> `immutable auto` -- ok `immutable const` -- not ok
>>
>> ergo, `auto` is not a storage class, but type placeholder.
>>
>>
> This analogy does not work. 'immutable' and 'automatic storage' do not
> conflict. 'immutable' and 'const' do conflict.
> 
> 'immutable auto' is exactly the same as 'auto immutable'. There is no
> 'int immutable'.

ok. what that "automatic storage" means after all? except being a 
placeholder.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to