On Sun, 2 Feb 2025, 07:00 J Decker via Std-Proposals, <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:The most notable complaint is loss of information about the preceding variable's type.... which can be handled with variable name notation like 'pBlah' vs 'oBlah'...No, Hungarian notation is not an acceptable alternative.The second complaint is the conflict with smart pointers...I wasn't quick enough at the time to say 'well if you're pushing use of smart pointers, andWhat does "pushing use of smart pointers" mean? Sounds like opinionated nonsense.
this doesn't affect smart pointers, since '.' already has a well defined behavior... it's a nothing-burger for you anyway; and would just be part of compatibility with C' (extending '.' to look at the left type).I'm not sure what you're trying to say. If -> is not used for pointers, but is still used for smart pointers and std::optional etc then you haven't really simplified anything. Just created inconsistency where there was consistency before.
The motivation for this change is very weak.there is typically one extra memory lookup when following '.'.Legacy behavior can be enforced by a linter.... but I've been considering adding it as a modification to the existing error to indicate that another option may be used to enable this behavior - then at least it's an opt-in; though that's a bit more work to implement than just the few lines in the right places...Jim--On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 3:53 AM Sebastian Wittmeier via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:--Because it is an active thread, I want to mention that there has been an update by SG22 (the C/C++ Liaison), now it is back in EWGI's court:
"Seen by SG22. Feedback to the author given. We do not think this paper is a good candidate for inclusion in C++. See minutes for details of discussion."
https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/868
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Filip via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org>
Gesendet: Fr 31.01.2025 11:33
Betreff: Re: [std-proposals] Possible deprecation of -> operator
An: std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org;
CC: Filip <fph2137@gmail.com>;
Hi thanks for that link, I will try and help with this.Cheers, FilipWiadomość napisana przez Sebastian Wittmeier via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org> w dniu 31 sty 2025, o godz. 11:27:Hi Filip,
I think it is a bit more involved.
There is an active proposal going into that direction:
https://github.com/cplusplus/papers/issues/868
P2142 Allow '.' operator to work on pointers
Perhaps you can cooperate?
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Filip via Std-Proposals <std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org>
Gesendet: Fr 31.01.2025 11:23
Betreff: [std-proposals] Possible deprecation of -> operator
An: std-proposals@lists.isocpp.org;
CC: Filip <fph2137@gmail.com>;
Hi everyone,
I’m wondering about the possibility of removal or deprecation of -> operator in favor of automatic dereference by ‘.’
If I remember correctly in tcc, compiler has a single if to check if they are used correctly and could automatically use the correct operation.
Are there any good reasons to keep that syntax?
In my experience it’s just an annoying part of early c that is maintained.
Cheers,
FilipCheers, Filip-- Std-Proposals mailing list Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals--
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals-- Std-Proposals mailing list Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
Std-Proposals mailing list
Std-Proposals@lists.isocpp.org
https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals