Re: [boost] [property] interest in C# like properties for C++?

Subject: Re: [boost] [property] interest in C# like properties for C++?
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-23 09:40:44

Olaf van der Spek wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Edward Diener <eldiener_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> Of course you can support reference properties along with value properties.
>> It is just very hard, if not impossible, to support both kinds using the
>> same template class. So really one would not a separate template class to
>> support reference properties.
> 
> Maybe I should've said class reference. Take std::string for example.
> I'd be very interested if you've got code that supports for example
> name.size() where name is your reference property class. name->size()
> is no problem, but I'd like to have name.size().

I understand your point, and you are right, and this is a notational 
weakness as compared with accessing the data directly.

I don't believe that one can define a dot ( '.' ) operator in C++ but 
maybe there is a metaprogramming way to hijack the dot operator. If 
there is I would be glad to use it.

Actually I have rejected defining the -> operator for my reference 
properties, because -> implies a pointer in standard C++ terminology and 
I do not think of reference properties "pointing" to their type object. 
Instead my reference properties have currently no built-in forwarder 
operator to the actual type object. One could currently use the more 
laborious form of:

propertyReference<std::string> name;
std::string & avar = name; // read/write property reference getter
avar.size() = 10; // or
std::string::size_type sz(avar.size());

or one could use my getter member function so one could write:

propertyReference<std::string> name;
name.getReference.size() = 10; // or
std::string::size_type sz(name.getReference.size());

Using a member function rather than an operator in this case is just a 
little more inconvenient.

My member function is actually currently called "getValue" for my 
reference property but I have decided that it is a confusing name since 
one is really getting a reference, and have changed it to "getReference".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

"So really one would not a separate template class to
support reference properties."

This was originally mistyped by me and should have been:

"So really one would need a separate template class to
support reference properties."

But I think you read through my error anyway without any problems.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------