Re: [boost] Re: More on auto

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-02-22 07:58:26

From: "brianjparker" <brianjparker_at_[hidden]>
> --- In boost_at_y..., "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_m...> wrote:
> > From: "Fernando Cacciola" <fcacciola_at_g...>
> > > I don't think that the very small increased complexity of
> requiring auto
> > > declarations to have a type name are not worth the increased
> safety.
> > > Don't you think it does improves safety a lot?
> >
> > No, actually, I don't. Partly because the right time to use auto
> > declarations is exactly when the actual type doesn't matter, and
> partly
> > because I don't see how requiring a dummy identifier would improve
> safety
> > somehow.
>
> Having the deduced type available is essential for functionality
> reasons as well as type safety improvements.

It's simple. When the deduced type is important, use a function template.
Otherwise, use an autodeclaration.