C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: explicit class

From: Thiago Macieira <thiago_at_[hidden]>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 13:16:01 -0800
On Tuesday, 12 November 2019 10:00:58 PST Steve Weinrich via Std-Proposals
> Will the enhancement cause undesirable behavior and/or damage? I believe
> that it does not. Of course, the topic of destruction is the big one. I do
> not feel so strongly about it to suggest that this must be an all or
> nothing implementation. To me, that is for a future discussion.

Everything that your proposal for explicit class could accomplish can already
be accomplished by explicitly deleting the implicit members. So it'll only be
used as a matter of taste by the programmer in question.

The problem is teachability and language burden. That's a completely
subjective metric. Why do we have two ways of doing things in the language?
You have to think of people reading the code 10 years from now and finding
this obscure corner-case of the language because most people don't use it.
It's like reviewing C99 code like:

  void manipulate(struct Element array[static 8]);

And wondering "wtf is static doing inside the array?"

Since all you're asking for can already be accomplished with a different
syntax, your case needs to be that your syntax is so much easier that it'll
eventually displace the older in circumstances more than "niche" and "corner-

Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel System Software Products

Received on 2019-11-12 15:18:22