FWIW "self" today is a perfectly good variable name, and practically all
C and C++ code that interacts with Python (including the C
implementation of Python itself) uses "self" to name variables
throughout: many thousands of projects, many millions of lines of code.
Having this snatched away as a keyword under some compiler settings
would be a major PITA.
On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 12:53 -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Ian,
>
> I was thinking C and C++.
>
> int myclass::foo(int a)
> {
> // recursion
> self(a + 1);
> }
>
> Just out of curiosity, why wouldn't it be accepted back into mainline?
>
> Thanks for your help. :-)
>
> Best regards,
> Rick C. Hodgin
>
> On 06/14/2012 12:48 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
> > "Rick C. Hodgin"<foxmuldrs...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >
> >> How hard would it be to implement a "self" keyword extension which
> >> references the contextual function name wherein it was referenced?
> >>
> >> int foo(int a)
> >> {
> >> // recursion
> >> self(a + 1);
> >> }
> >>
> >> int food(int a)
> >> {
> >> // recursion
> >> self(a + 1);
> >> }
> >>
> >> Obviously not a useful example, but demonstrates that to call each
> >> function it's in again that it can be done without knowing the
> >> function name.
> > I assume you are asking about C? It would be easy to implement. The
> > compiler always know what function it is compiling. But I don't think
> > the extension would be accepted back into GCC mainline.
> >
> > Ian
> >
