Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 01:33:20 +0000
Barry,
The answers to your questions depend on what we are discussing. If we are discussing an alternative syntax to the non-static member functions, then the answers to your questions are self-evident. There is no need for me to answer them. The same rules that currently govern the non-static member functions will continue to govern them in C++23, regardless of what syntax we use to write those functions.
If the topic that we are discussing is the new kind of functions that is proposed in P0847, which is different from the non-static member functions of C++20, then I really don't want to be part of this discussion. The whole reason I started this discussion is because I don't support adding that new kind of functions to C++. It does not matter to me what rules you will make for those new functions. I have no opinion on that issue.
Hani
The answers to your questions depend on what we are discussing. If we are discussing an alternative syntax to the non-static member functions, then the answers to your questions are self-evident. There is no need for me to answer them. The same rules that currently govern the non-static member functions will continue to govern them in C++23, regardless of what syntax we use to write those functions.
If the topic that we are discussing is the new kind of functions that is proposed in P0847, which is different from the non-static member functions of C++20, then I really don't want to be part of this discussion. The whole reason I started this discussion is because I don't support adding that new kind of functions to C++. It does not matter to me what rules you will make for those new functions. I have no opinion on that issue.
Hani
Received on 2021-08-03 20:33:25