Re: [C++-0X] User-defined literals, gsoc

["Levon Haykazyan" <levon at rock dot com>]

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw4rd@verizon.net>
> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: [C++-0X] User-defined literals, gsoc
> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:16:52 -0400
> 
> 
> On 03/29/2011 10:05 AM, Levon Haykazyan wrote:
> > Hi Ed,
> >
> > I am working on a proposal to implement user-defined literals as a Google
> > Summer of Code project. I was unaware that someone was already working on
> > it. If you have already done some work, maybe it is better for me to pick
> > another project. Or maybe you would be interested in mentoring me and we
> > could combine our efforts.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Levon
> >
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Ed Smith-Rowland<3dw4rd@verizon.net>
> >> To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> >> Subject: [C++-0X] User-defined literals
> >> Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:13:19 -0400
> >>
> >>
> >> Greetings,
> >>
> >> I am taking a new shot at user-defined literals.
> >> Compared to the previous attempt:
> >>     * I have altered libcpp so that it tokenizes user defined
> >> literals in one chunk properly.
> >>     * I have started work on new tree nodes and accessors.
> >>     * I have (or am trying to) refine the checks for argument and
> >> template parameter.
> >>
> >> I would like to check that template literal operators have the
> >> specific non-type parameter pack:
> >> template<char...>
> >>     Foo operator"" sluggo();
> >>
> >> I looked through the internals documentation and didn't see much on
> >> this.  Could anyone give me some pointers?
> >>
> >> Also, is there any preference for using VEC vs. TREE_CHAIN for
> >> making trees and accessing them?  Is one sort of "modern"?
> >>
> >> Finally I am using compparms to verify that a literal operator
> >> argument list conforms to strings like:
> >> (const char*)
> >> (const char*, std::size_t)
> >> (const wchar_t*, std::size_t)
> >> ...
> >> I cant get them to work.  I built a set of global trees for the
> >> argument types that I want to check.  The char and number tests
> >> work.
> >> I use things like this to build the argument lists (I neglect the
> >> return type).
> >>       userdef_lit_char16_str_type
> >>        = build_function_type_list (void_type_node, char16_array_type_node,
> >>                    size_type_node, NULL_TREE);
> >> I'm hoping that this matches
> >> (const char16_t*, std::size_t)
> >> but it doesn't.
> >>
> >> Ideas?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> Ed Smith-Rowland
> >
> Levon,
> 
> I would be happy to share what I've got.  Let me clean it up some 
> and I'll post it tomorrow.  Then we'll see if
> a. You want to pick another project
> b. Pick over what I have and start from there
> c. Start over on your own ;-)
> 
> There is a good amount of work left to do I think.  I have to admit 
> I'm a newbie on gcc internals.  You may be in a better position to 
> finish this time-wise.
> 
> I am interested in seeing this get in so we can all play with it 
> before the standard comes out.  There are some who would pull it 
> out of the standard for want of implementation experience.
> 
> Ed

>

Ed,

I gave this another thought. I think it is better for you to continue your
project and for me to pick something else, because at this point it is
entirely unclear whether my proposal will be accepted or not (and it will
remain so about another month).

Kind regards,
Levon


-- 
You Rock! Your E-Mail Should Too! Signup Now at Rock.com and get 2GB of Storage!

http://connections.rock.com/user/displayUserRegisterPage.kickAction?as=116748&STATUS=MAIN