Article View: comp.std.c++
Article #637Re: Pre-proposal: ~const [Rev 1.6]
From: Joe Buck
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 1990 20:56
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 1990 20:56
22 lines
1490 bytes
1490 bytes
ngo@tammy.harvard.edu (Tom Ngo) writes:
> If this usage of ~const were to be adopted, we would be obligated
> to consider a similar type-specifier, ~volatile, ....
No, we wouldn't. ~volatile wouldn't buy you anything. It would presumably
be used to specify that a specific member in a volatile object is not
volatile. While that would give a tiny bit of useful information to
an optimizing compiler, it would gain nothing in expressive capability.
I'm not sure I'm for the ~const feature, but the proposer does have an
argument. I don't see the corresponding argument existing for ~volatile.
You might want to include it anyway for consistency in the grammar.
schwartz@groucho.cs.psu.edu (Scott Schwartz) writes:
> And maybe even ~alias, too. :-)
Cute. (For those that don't get the joke, this refers to the "noalias"
keyword that was almost added by the ANSI C committee.
--
Joe Buck
jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu {uunet,ucbvax}!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuck
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<9799@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!dog.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuckReferences:
<NGO.90Dec14093655@tammy.harvard.edu> <F.-uu-u3@cs.psu.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!dog.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!galileo.berkeley.edu!jbuck From: jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: Pre-proposal: ~const [Rev 1.6] Message-ID: <9799@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> Date: 15 Dec 90 20:56:28 GMT References: <NGO.90Dec14093655@tammy.harvard.edu> <F.-uu-u3@cs.psu.edu> Sender: news@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU Reply-To: jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) Distribution: comp Lines: 22