Responses to ~const 1.6: Compiler complexity?

Thread View: comp.std.c++

1 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

1 total messages Started by Tom Ngo Tue, 19 Feb 1991 16:43

#851

Author: Tom Ngo
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 1991 16:43

24 lines
1495 bytes

Background information to this posting was in a very recent summary.

Anyone who proposes an extension to C++ bears the onus of convincing
the standardization committee that the extension can be implemented
realistically.  I have never written a compiler.  Those of you out
there who have, what are your reactions to how easily ~const could be
implemented?

My hunch is that it would be quite easy.  At present, when the
compiler needs to decide whether an entity x is const, it must descend
a tree from the largest enclosing object to the member containing x,
until it hits a "const" specifier.  If it never his a const specifier,
x is not const; otherwise it is.

With ~const, the compiler would not be able to stop at the first const
specifier.  Instead, it would have to continue descending the tree,
looking for ~const specifiers, and so on.

Is this wild guess incorrect?
--
  Tom Ngo
  ngo@harvard.harvard.edu
  617/495-1768 lab number, leave message

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads