Brian Aker wrote:
Hi!
I saw this gem from Mats today:
"I would prefer if we never used typedef to introduce aliases for
struct/class/union, they cause more problem that it's worth, and they
are not
needed in C++ at all."
We should do this as well. There are only a few places where we should
be using typedef at this point, and even in those few cases I still
wonder if we should be (mainly I think of ha_rows).
+1. At least, we should strongly prefer NOT to typedef.
Agreed that in the case of ha_rows, it might be useful.
But stuff like this:
typedef ptrdiff_t my_ptrdiff_t;
is, well, silly.
And stuff like:
typedef Item COND;
is just obfuscating the code.
Where I *do* think typedef's are useful is within C++ STL-like classes
where I can typedef value_type or size_type internally to the class...
-jay
Cheers,
-Brian
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
