C++ Logo


Advanced search

Subject: Re: [std-proposals] Variadic function template equivalents for operator overloading
From: Christopher Hallock (christopherhallock_at_[hidden])
Date: 2021-05-04 14:29:03

On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 1:49 PM Phil Endecott via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 04/05/2021 20.36, Phil Endecott via Std-Proposals wrote:
> >> Yes, I'm aware of that. The rationale that I've seen does not
> >> say much about a preference for variadic function syntax vs.
> >> operator-overloading. There is mention of "chevron hell" in the
> >> {fmt} library's github page. The introduction to the <format>
> >> paper P0645R10 says "printf offers some advantages, such as an
> >> arguably more natural function call API" (which I interpret as
> >> meaning arguably more natural than chained operator overloading).
> >> I'm curious as to what the committee thought - if anything -
> >> about this aspect when <format> was being considered.
> >
> > Since they adopted the proposal, it appears they agree that the
> > function-call syntax is more natural than chaining.
> But C++20 also added the new chained operator| for ranges, so I don't
> think it's clear what the preferred style is.
> (Are there any other examples?)

That's different, though. Ranges API uses | for actual pipelining, e.g.
f(g(h(x))) not f(a,b,c).

STD-PROPOSALS list run by std-proposals-owner@lists.isocpp.org

Standard Proposals Archives on Google Groups