This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Is this legal C++?
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, zack at wolery dot cumb dot org
- Subject: Re: Is this legal C++?
- From: Mike Stump <mrs at windriver dot com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 20:23:00 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Zack Weinberg <zack@wolery.cumb.org>
> Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2000 14:08:04 -0700
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> C::oper (x, y);
> Now I find this somewhat surprising.
I agree.
> Why doesn't the "implicit this" syntactic sugar extend to an
> implicit ->* for references to pointer-to-member-function members?
No reason.
> I can't find anything relevant in the standard.
It is in there.
Background. I implemented implicit this in all these various
contexts. I liked it. Someone else removed it or it bit rotted.
This in part because I didn't document it, I hate writting docs.
Anyway, since there is no reason not to do this (that I know of), and
since ptrfun() works, I think it is a fine extension, and I'll go
donate my kidney this weekend.