Subject: Re: [boost] [ Interest? ] [ out_ptr ] Tiny C++ Abstraction for C-Style Output Pointers
From: Gavin Lambert (gavinl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-07-03 04:15:56
On 3/07/2018 14:42, ThePhD wrote:
> This does not have any other use case than C and COM-Style API
> interoperability: both `out_ptr` and `inout_ptr` and streamlined interfaces
> purely for this purpose and to make writing against such APIs more
> pleasant, more performant, and (most of all) more developer-time scale-able
> than alternative approaches such as wrapping all such initialization-style
> functions in C++-isms.
Purely for bikeshedding purposes a name like c_out_ptr might be better
in that case.
When initially seeing "out_ptr" and the syntax in your original email,
at first glance it looked like the intent was as a reference wrapper
annotation (to make it more obvious at the call site that the pointer
will be modified on return), rather than the typical "solution" of using
an /*out*/ comment or similar non-functional and non-checked annotation.
(I suppose you can use std::ref for that purpose, but the intent is less
clear. And perhaps less necessary once compilers and libraries start
using multiple return values via structured binding.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk