View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
January 04, 2006
Re: SizeOf <what??>
In article <dpet5r$16g0$3@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>
>
>"Craig Black" <cblack@ara.com> wrote in message 
>news:dpej71$s0i$1@digitaldaemon.com...
[...]
>>
>> (foo(i) / bar(j)).typeof var;
>
>That leads to parsing problems, unfortunately, as it becomes difficult to 
>recognize a declaration vs an expression. 

Walter, what do you think about my idea of (optionally) disambiguating
declarations from expressions?

Ciao
January 04, 2006
Re: SizeOf <what??>
Matthew wrote:
> "Craig Black" <cblack@ara.com> wrote in message
> news:dpek7p$tga$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>>Perhaps, but sizeof is evaluated at compile time as well.
>>
>>This does seem odd.  If it doesn't overcomplicate the compiler, then
> 
> typeof
> 
>>should be consistent with the rest of the "*of" family.
> 
> 
> My 2 cents: all should be non-member operators, a la typeof.

Actually, that's not a bad idea at all, at least for the *of() ops.  Mister Bright?

-- Chris Sauls
Next ›   Last »
1 2
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home