C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [std-proposals] The Oxford variadic comma

From: Barry Revzin <barry.revzin_at_[hidden]>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 11:27:39 -0600
On Fri, Mar 1, 2024, 11:08 AM Jan Schultke via Std-Proposals <
std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> > void f(auto x ...) // deprecated, equivalent to f(auto,...)
> This is wrong. That case is not getting deprecated (and should not). I
> have extended the deprecation example in the proposed wording, but I
> think it's sufficiently clear otherwise.

Uh, why not? Is there a particular reason why it's important to allow
omitting the comma specifically here?

> Everything deprecated would become ill-formed in the future, or would
> have its meaning altered by a future proposal that claims the syntax.
> I don't think it's worth mentioning any of the cases that are already
> ill-formed (such as (int......)).
> I also want to keep what will become of the syntax intentionally
> vague, since we don't know whether it will be removed or reclaimed.
> All the developer needs to know is what is getting deprecated.
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals

Received on 2024-03-01 17:27:53