Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 15:06:19 -0400
Bad example, I'll show a better one later.
-- *Phil Bouchard* Founder C.: (819) 328-4743 Fornux Logo <http://www.fornux.com> On 9/29/19 2:48 PM, Tony V E wrote: > Is there some reason to use assignment as your example? It seems a > strange example, since we don't normally assign to const objects, nor > build assignments that don't assign. > > Maybe a more motivating and less distracting example would be better. > > Sent from my BlackBerry portable Babbage Device > *From: *Phil Bouchard via Std-Proposals > *Sent: *Sunday, September 29, 2019 8:52 AM > *To: *std-proposals_at_[hidden] > *Reply To: *std-proposals_at_[hidden] > *Cc: *Phil Bouchard > *Subject: *[std-proposals] Template qualifiers > > > Greetings, > > > How many time did we have to redundantly write the same member > functions just to add a const version? Ex.: > > struct A > > { > > A & operator = (A const &) { return * this; } > > A const & operator = (A const &) const { return * this; } > > }; > > > What I would like to suggest would be to templatize those instances as > such: > > struct A > > { > > template <qualifier Q> > > A Q & operator = (A const &) Q { return * this; } > > }; > > > This would in instantiate on-the-fly the 2 (or 4) versions of the same > code. > > > Thank you, > > -- > > *Phil Bouchard* > Founder > C.: (819) 328-4743 > > Fornux Logo <http://www.fornux.com> >
Received on 2019-09-29 14:08:31