3

I am not sure if this is the type of question that should be asked on Stack Overflow but I was wondering how and when one can tell if operator dot is going to be included in C++17? I read that the meeting in which this decision was going to be made would be towards the end of June of 2016 (http://www.infoworld.com/article/3044727/application-development/qa-bjarne-stroustrup-previews-c-17.html)

I am getting slightly impatient as I personally do not want it to be included in the standard :(

Curious
  • 20,870
  • 8
  • 61
  • 146
  • You could also follow the [cpp reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/cpp/) `[...]bstroustrup (25. June): We found an inconsistency in the design document. It will be fixed ASAP. The fix has already been presented to the evolution working group.[...]` – t.niese Jun 30 '16 at 17:23
  • 10
    "I personally do not want it to be included in the standard" - then you should speak up and voice your objections to the comittee - it's a public process and everyone can get their voice heard. Get involved if you have opinions. – Jesper Juhl Jun 30 '16 at 17:25
  • 3
    @JesperJuhl: Well, it's a public process for people who have the time and money to travel long distances, in many cases to different countries, and spend a week doing nothing but talking about C++. – Nicol Bolas Jun 30 '16 at 18:42
  • You can send in papers via email and discuss things that way - travel is *not* required. – Jesper Juhl Jun 30 '16 at 18:44
  • @JesperJuhl: A paper which does not get presented by *someone* has no effect on the committee's decisions. They've [made that quite clear](https://isocpp.org/std/submit-a-proposal); either you have to go yourself or you have to find an advocate to present it in your stead. – Nicol Bolas Jun 30 '16 at 19:13
  • You can still do it. Those are not insurmountable obstacles. – Jesper Juhl Jun 30 '16 at 19:19
  • @Curious, what is your concern with op dot? – Johan Lundberg Jul 03 '16 at 09:15
  • 1
    @JohanLundberg I love C++, it is by far my favorite programming language out there. But the only complaint I have is that the language tends to get way too complicated way too fast, and people do not use the language for that fact. It is understandable to an extent. Now the operator dot is another thing that is going to introduce a lot of complexity in the language. I am perfectly fine with its semantics being similar to the `operator->` semantics. That seems natural. ...... – Curious Jul 03 '16 at 18:36
  • 1
    @JohanLundberg But if the plan is to forward *all* operations to the returned element then it is going to complicate a lot of code very fast. and while it solves some (maybe a lot of) problems it is going to create a lot of them as well. The paper itself was quite annoying to follow because of all the corner cases that were being talked about. .... – Curious Jul 03 '16 at 18:36
  • @JohanLundberg C++ has always been a very clear language with set of well defined rules that make code easy to follow. With smart pointers you know that you have an object and *not* a pointer. Therefore if you use the `->` or the `*` operators then you are working with the inner pointer. But with `operator .()`, it seems much harder to tell what exactly is going on. But I might be completely wrong and what I am saying might not be making much sense so please correct me if you think I'm wrong – Curious Jul 03 '16 at 18:36
  • 1
    @Curious the traditional "object oriented" way of programming is outdated, there are other languages which achieve the same results but without all the "advanced" features of C++. The newer additions to the language are features to make template metaprogramming more accessible, which imo they have achieved well in the last iterations of the standard. – aerkenemesis May 16 '17 at 10:23
  • @JesperJuhl It _is_ insurmountable for someone like me living a 28 hour flight away who doesn't have thousands of dollars to spend on advocating an opinion. Maybe you have that kind of money and time - I have kids to feed. Perhaps Nicol is also in my situation or maybe not but it seems to me that its only insurmountable for people living in Europe. – Jerry Jeremiah Jul 31 '18 at 21:50

0 Answers0