Re: "self" keyword

[David Brown <david dot brown at hesbynett dot no>]

On 14/06/12 19:31, Joe Buck wrote:
> It only saves one character in any case: your "self" is just "*this".

No, "this" points to the object in C++.  The OP's "self" is referring to 
the function being compiled.  So here "self" would be the same as "foo".

I don't think there is any way to get this without making a language 
extension, unless there is some way of turning the string __FUNC__ into 
the function.  But I also don't see any advantage over simply using the 
function name directly.  After all, how often do you need recursion - 
and what is the problem with writing out the function name in full on 
those occasions?

mvh.,

David



> ________________________________________
> From: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org [gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org] on behalf of Ian Lance Taylor [iant@google.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:19 AM
> To: Rick C. Hodgin
> Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: "self" keyword
>
> "Rick C. Hodgin"<foxmuldrster@yahoo.com>  writes:
>
> > I was thinking C and C++.
> >
> > int myclass::foo(int a)
> > {
> >      // recursion
> >      self(a + 1);
> > }
> >
> > Just out of curiosity, why wouldn't it be accepted back into mainline?
>
> In general these days GCC discourages language extensions.  They would
> have to have a compelling advantage.  I don't see that here.  Even if I
> did, I would recommend running it through a language standards body
> first.
>
> Ian