C++ Logo

SG7

Advanced search

Subject: Re: [isocpp-ext] P2320: "The Syntax of Static Reflection" feedback request
From: Gašper Ažman (gasper.azman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-02-16 10:28:47


I also agree with the paper authors that we shouldn't standardize omitting
'...' until we have more usage experience. We're in danger of going down
the perl-route of flattening lists implicitly, which is *also* a terrible
mistake. At least right now we have no way to pass packs (perl list
analogues) and they're always forwarded explicitly flattened, so flattening
is not surprising.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 4:24 PM Andrew Sutton via Ext <ext_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

>
> > I suspect that CMake would be considerably less happy than they suggest
>> if
>> > $ suddenly had meaning in C++ and they were forced to redesign their
>> > templating syntax.
>>
>> $x or $(x) are not a problem for CMake; it uses ${x} (typically even
>> turned
>> off with @ONLY) and this cannot occur in the hypothetical C++ dialect
>> under
>> discussion.
>>
>
> Until we realize ${x} is underutilized and grab it for something else :)
>
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> Ext mailing list
> Ext_at_[hidden]
> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/ext
> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/ext/2021/02/15907.php
>



SG7 list run by sg7-owner@lists.isocpp.org

Older Archives on Google Groups