On 2011-06-03 05:14, bearophile wrote: > Jonathan M Davis: > > Personally, I find the added complexity of C++'s special casts to _far_ > > outweight what benefit they give you. > > I don't want to copy C++, I prefer casts better designed than C++ ones, and > probably they don't need language-level support. I'd like a cast to cast > enums safely, to be integrated into to!(). A StaticObjCast just for > statically and safely cast object references. One cast to change the const > status of a type const <-> immutable <-> mutable. I'd like to keep unqual > and to!(). dynCast is better explicit, because it has a not small runtime > cost, and its purpose is quite different from other casts, so such > differences are worth showing visually too.
And I would argue that the fact that you have separate casts in the first place is 90% of the problem. Sure, you could design the casts better, but having to deal with more than one type of cast is the core of my complaint in the first place. I find it to be very annoying and of little value. - Jonathan M Davis
