This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: RFC: mp = &o.f;
> > > The refering URL is:
> > > http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2002/n1384.pdf
I wrote:
> > That document makes three proposals. The first one, bound pointers to
> > members, I would heartily support, as it would greatly simplify a lot
> > of the code that I (and others) write....
> > ...
> > It might make sense for GCC to accept clean implementations of serious
> > standard-extension proposals, but we'd need to be very cautious about
> > it...
On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 05:17:04AM +0100, Christian Parpart wrote:
> What exactly does this now mean to the possible implementation of (at least)
> the bound pointers to members in g++?
At least two things would need to happen: first, a motivated person would
need to contribute a patch that implements the feature in a minimally
disruptive manner (against the CVS trunk, not the current release).
Second, the C++ front end maintainers would need to approve it. There
would be some reluctance to implement an extension, but less so if it is a
formal proposal to the standards committee that is seen as having some
chance of being accepted.
Proposals that others do work generally aren't greeted with much
enthusiasm. Good contributions, though, that is another matter.