From: Emily Winch (emily_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-21 10:23:21
Herb Sutter said:
> New question: It seems that strict typeof would give the same result as
> above. Then what do you need strict typeof for: What contexts can strict
> typeof be used in that wouldn't already be covered with this definition of
> auto? In particular, this already covers return types and local variables
> the same way typeof would.
With typeof you can write a "type function" class that can be used like this
typedef deduce_parameters<typeof(&func)>::first func_first_param_type;
Unless I missed something (which is quite likely :) ), you can't do that
with current C++ and you can't do it with auto either. It's possible you
could fake it with
auto first_param = get_fake_first_parameter(&func);
But that's truly unpleasant, not to mention broken.
PS I have never actually needed to do this, so it could be a non-issue.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk