Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2023 18:53:52 +0200
You don't need a __dummy keyword.
The following syntax could be used to define anonymous objects:
type = initializer;
type = { initializer };
type = { initializer1, initializer2 };
etc.
The key ingredient is the = sign. Without that, a temporary object would be
created which is destroyed immediately.
A type name follwoed by an equal initializar
On 10 Jun 2023 at 15:27, Frederick Virchanza Gotham via Std-Propos wrote:
> Sometimes I have code like this:
>
> void Func(void)
> {
> OnScopeExit dummy( [](){ ::close(global_fd); } );
>
> // Do more stuff here
> }
>
> If I later amend this function so that further down there's another
> 'OnScopeExit', then I have to name the second one "dummy1", and the
> third one "dummy2" and so on.
>
> For the sake of making it easier to patch source files, I propose that
> we can give an object a dummy name as follows:
>
> void Func(void)
> {
> OnScopeExit __dummy( [](){ /* Do Something */ } );
>
> // Do more stuff here
>
> OnScopeExit __dummy( [](){ /* Do Something */ } );
>
> // Do more stuff here
>
> OnScopeExit __dummy( [](){ /* Do Something */ } );
> }
>
> These objects don't have a name clash. If you try to access an object
> by the name '__dummy', it accesses the most recently defined dummy
> object:
>
> void Func(void)
> {
> OnScopeExit __dummy( [](){ /* Do Something */ } );
>
> // Do more stuff here
> _dummy.SomeMethod(); // refers to the object defined 3 lines above
>
> OnScopeExit __dummy( [](){ /* Do Something */ } );
>
> // Do more stuff here
> _dummy.SomeMethod(); // refers to the object defined 3 lines above
>
> OnScopeExit __dummy( [](){ /* Do Something */ } );
> }
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
Received on 2023-06-10 16:53:58