Denis Koroskin wrote:
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?
That's a good point, thanks.
Andrei
