For pointers, using * and & for dereferencing seems ugly, a more interesting syntax could be:

A* aPtr;
A instanceA;

to point aPtr to instanceA, instead of

<code> aPtr = &instanceA; </code>

write

<code> aPtr -> instanceA; </code>

and it reads "aPtr points to instanceA". This frees the pointer syntax up from
the * & operators,
Using this syntax, one can eliminate the need for the dereferencing operator
(*), and use pointers directly with operators etc, i.e.

int i1, i2, i3;
int* p1, p2, p3;

p1 -> i1;
p2 -> i2;
p3 -> i3;

p3 = p1 + p2;

And this has the same effect as i1 = i2 + i3;
This would largely simplify the coding for containers, and allow a custom
container to do things like

myVector[3]++;

provided that the opIndex operator for MyVector returns a pointer. Also makes the pointer behave much like C++ reference types.

Tesuji escribió:
> For pointers, using * and & for dereferencing seems ugly, a more interesting
> syntax could be:
> 
> A* aPtr;
> A instanceA;
> 
> to point aPtr to instanceA, instead of
> 
> <code> aPtr = &instanceA; </code>
> 
> write
> 
> <code> aPtr -> instanceA; </code>
> 
> and it reads "aPtr points to instanceA". This frees the pointer syntax up from
> the * & operators, Using this syntax, one can eliminate the need for the dereferencing operator
> (*), and use pointers directly with operators etc, i.e.
> 
> int i1, i2, i3;
> int* p1, p2, p3;
> 
> p1 -> i1;
> p2 -> i2;
> p3 -> i3;
> 
> p3 = p1 + p2;
> 
> And this has the same effect as i1 = i2 + i3;

Except that sometimes people wants to do pointer arithmetic.

In any case, since C does pointers in this way (like D), it's really unlikely Walter is going to change it (to give it any hope at all ;).)

> This would largely simplify the coding for containers, and allow a custom
> container to do things like
> 
> myVector[3]++;
> 
> provided that the opIndex operator for MyVector returns a pointer. Also makes
> the pointer behave much like C++ reference types.
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Carlos Santander Bernal

Tesuji wrote:
> For pointers, using * and & for dereferencing seems ugly, a more interesting
> syntax could be:
> 
> A* aPtr;
> A instanceA;
> 
> to point aPtr to instanceA, instead of
> 
> <code> aPtr = &instanceA; </code>
> 
> write
> 
> <code> aPtr -> instanceA; </code>
<snip>

If you want Fortran, you know where to find it.

Moreover, the -> notation will just confuse people coming from C(++), where it has a completely different meaning.

Stewart.