Re: [boost] Pimpl Again?

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]>
>wrote:
>
>> 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
>do_something(p),
>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.

___
Rob

(Sent from my portable computation engine)