This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Nested Functions in C++

From: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
Cc: Steven Bosscher <stevenb at suse dot de>,Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>,"Steven L. Zook" <SLZook at Qualstar dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 09:52:09 -0400
Subject: Re: Nested Functions in C++
References: <9E27B4AB55478346B9F7848926E49B7F4F729A@exchange1.qualstar.com> <41795308.3070002@codesourcery.com> <16762.15479.761874.794593@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com> <200410231324.00350.stevenb@suse.de> <16762.21902.51170.493276@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>

Andrew Haley wrote:

Indeed.  These are serious risks, and must be carefully weighed when
considering language extensions.  But you have to balance risks, and I
believe that the risk of the ISO standardizing a bad language feature
is far greater if that feature has not been much used.

Andrew.


One point here is that I think any such experimental features
should never be available by default. It should be necessary
to use some special switch or directive.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Nested Functions in C++
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis

References:
- Nested Functions in C++
  - From: Steven L. Zook
- Re: Nested Functions in C++
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: Nested Functions in C++
  - From: Andrew Haley
- Re: Nested Functions in C++
  - From: Steven Bosscher
- Re: Nested Functions in C++
  - From: Andrew Haley

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]