• Syd Barrett (7/7) Sep 12 2002 I just read a very interesting document on 'smart pointers' vis a vis C+...
• Sandor Hojtsy (8/11) Sep 16 2002 This page worth the effort to read it. I always wanted those features in
• Walter (5/7) Sep 16 2002 possibility
• anderson (5/12) Sep 17 2002 D is more free for development in more areas then C++. C++ must remain C...

"Syd Barrett" <sydbarrett74%REMOVE%THIS% hotmail.com> writes:

I just read a very interesting document on 'smart pointers' vis a vis C++.
Anyone care to comment?

http://www.animats.com/papers/languages/strictpointers.html



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.386 / Virus Database: 218 - Release Date: 9/10/2002

"Sandor Hojtsy" <hojtsy index.hu> writes:

"Syd Barrett" <sydbarrett74%REMOVE%THIS% hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:alpois$1e1$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I just read a very interesting document on 'smart pointers' vis a vis C++.
 Anyone care to comment?

 http://www.animats.com/papers/languages/strictpointers.html

This page worth the effort to read it. I always wanted those features in
C++. The semantic rules, the syntax could be improved (with some help from
the compiler). Note the interesting usage of the "auto" keyword: Just the
opposite of the current D raii proposed syntax.
But it came as a suprise to me: anyone actually considering the possibility
of a "next major revision of C++" ?

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

"Sandor Hojtsy" <hojtsy index.hu> wrote in message
news:am4a39$1kfn$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 But it came as a suprise to me: anyone actually considering the

possibility
 of a "next major revision of C++" ?

I think there's a strong possibility that any next version of C++ is going
to look at D for new features.

"anderson" <anderson firestar.com.au> writes:

D is more free for development in more areas then C++. C++ must remain C/C++
backwards compatable. However, there are many things in D that C++ could
use.

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:am5g85$2vsm$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Sandor Hojtsy" <hojtsy index.hu> wrote in message
 news:am4a39$1kfn$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 But it came as a suprise to me: anyone actually considering the

 possibility
 of a "next major revision of C++" ?

 I think there's a strong possibility that any next version of C++ is going
 to look at D for new features.