On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 02:38:13 +0400, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]> 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  expression creating a @class@
object---\cc{new Test(}\meta{args}@)@---may be  jarring at first. \dee
could have dropped the @new@  keyword entirely, but that @new@ reminds
the programmer that an object allocation (i.e., nontrivial work) takes
place.
===============

I'm unhappy about that explanation because the distinction is indeed very weak. The constructor of a struct could also do unbounded amounts of work, so what gives?

I hereby suggest we get rid of new for class object creation. What do you guys think?


Andrei

This is tricky. How would you explain that the following

Test test;

initializes a variable if it is struct, but doesn't initialize if it's a class?
(*hint* non-nullable and explicit initialization *hint*)

test.foo(); // why is my newly-created class object segfaulting but struct doesn't?

Reply via email to