Subject: Re: [boost] Pimpl Again?
From: Rob Stewart (rstewart_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-05-31 17:48:11
On May 31, 2016 5:41:54 PM EDT, Emil Dotchevski <emildotchevski_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Chris Glover <c.d.glover_at_[hidden]>
>> You're making a very compelling argument. Actually strong enough that
>> it makes me want the uniform call syntax when I was previously on the
>> fence about that feature.
>I'm generally not in favor of adding stuff to C++. What's the upside in
>this case? To be able to say p.do_something() instead of
>because the latter offends Java programmers? :)
The upside is not writing some calls one way and others the other way on the same object, and having to remember which is which.
(Sent from my portable computation engine)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk