C++ Logo

STD-PROPOSALS

Advanced search

Subject: Re: [std-proposals] deleting qualified named functions
From: Daniel Gutson (danielgutson_at_[hidden])
Date: 2020-02-05 15:57:38


El mié., 5 feb. 2020 11:18, Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer_at_[hidden]>
escribió:

> On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:12 AM Daniel Gutson via Std-Proposals <
> std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> I think this still is a really simple solution. I'll see if this gets
>> more traction.
>>
>
> You need to provide more motivation.
> "What if I have an empty struct type that is trivially copyable and
> assignable but for some bizarre unexplained reason I want it to be
> non-swappable" is simply no motivation at all.
>

With all due respect Arthur, have you seen my clarification that swap was
an example and that the goal is to be able to prevent whatever function in
a different namespace/scope? For example, foo::bar()
That's the motivation, rather than preventing swapping (where I think
"bizarre" is an unneeded word in terms of netiquette).

> –Arthur
>



STD-PROPOSALS list run by herb.sutter at gmail.com

Standard Proposals Archives on Google Groups