This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Re: c++ "with" keyword
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- To: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, normanjonas at arcor dot de
- Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 09:29:15 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: Re: c++ "with" keyword
> I think you missed the point. The reason for the with keyword is not to use
> a pointer but to leave
> the long structs name which is not done by your example :
My viewpoint here is that gcc should not be used as an arena for
implementing random language extensions, no matter how meritorious
they be. Yes, we have some useful extensions in C that should
certainly be maintained at this stage (e.g. nested procedures),
but it is a mistake to go implementing new ones unless there is
some very convincing argument, and a simple "gosh, this woul dbe
convenient to have" is never convincing enough in this context.
If you think "with" is valuable, then the task is to convince the
guardians of the C++ standard of this. If you can't convince the
C++ community to add the feature, then I think it is a mistake
for gcc to second guess.