home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: Dick Menninger <Dick.Menninger@daytonoh.attgis.com>
- Message-ID: <DLyuzs.AI0@falcon.daytonoh.attgis.com>
- X-Original-Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996 23:38:16 GMT
- Path: in2.uu.net!bounce-back
- Date: 30 Jan 96 04:20:52 GMT
- Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: Give operator. a chance
- Reply-To: mennid <Dick.Menninger@daytonoh.attgis.com>
- Organization: AT&T Global Information Solutions
- X-Newsreader: DiscussIT 2.5.1.3 for MS Windows [AT&T Software Products Division]
- References: <9601260532.14152@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU>
- X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++
- iQBFAgUBMQ2ctuEDnX0m9pzZAQHsVQF8DZssEdS/YoNJ52grfzU0ZdsI7qtmmg3x
- 6RxqCiU1C090jsUhS6c8LXybDR6VSMFC
- =2Emv
-
- > ==========Fergus Henderson, 1/26/96==========
-
- [stuff deleted]
-
- > David Byrden <100101.2547@compuserve.com> writes:
-
- [...]
-
- > >Operator.() was not overloaded because you can achieve exactly
- > this same
- > >effect without it,
-
- > Perhaps you can in this particular case...
-
- > >if the clas Handle has a set of member functions matching those
- > in Bitmap,
-
- > .... but only with a lot of tedious programming. Furthermore,
- all those
- > forwarding functions are a maintenance problem; every time you add
- > a new function to Bitmap, you need to remember to add one to Handle.
-
- > Now, please tell me how to write a template smart reference
- class without
- > using operator.()? Can I attain that effect "with a little programming
- > using existing facilities"? I think not.
-
- Now that this discussion has gone far enough to convince
- me that there is real merit to this, and that extensively
- discussed never implies that it is wisely decided, I have
- some pragmatic questions.
-
- Does the draft explicitly exclude what it does not require?
- In this case, that means does the draft preclude compilers
- from allowing this, possibly as an option? Or can compilers
- provide more extensive capabilities, possibly with enabling
- flags, than the draft specifies? Note that doing that will be
- part of looking at later extensions which will have to happen
- in the lull after the standardizing storm. I hope that it is
- possible as an optional extension (that is likely to become
- a defacto addition in real use).
-
- We MUST look beyond the current standardization wall
- that is putting a BIG ripple in the evolution of the language.
- As a user, I certainly take that perspective and try very
- hard to represent it here.
-
- Good Day
- Dick
- Dick.Menninger@DaytonOH.ATTGIS.COM
- ---
- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
- Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu. The moderation policy
- is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]
-