C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: On "transparently replaceable" in std::vector operations

From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 21:22:21 +0300
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 at 21:12, Hyman Rosen <hyrosen_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> I respectfully believe you are giving me the courtier's reply: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtier%27s_reply
> That is, one does not need to be a tailor to proclaim that the emperor is naked. Things like bit_cast and launder, the inscrutability of the aliasing rules, the questions about the pointer arithmetic used to implement vector, all show that something is very wrong with the object model.
> There's is also zero chance that a proposal to model objects as memory+type would ever be accepted, because it would do away with many of the permissions the current situation gives to compiler writers to optimize code (which is also permission to disregard programmer intent).

So, you're playing a broken record, complaining when it's described a
broken record, and plan to continue to do nothing
about it but keep playing it?

Received on 2021-04-27 13:22:34