Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #15126

Re: Any way to defer template function overloading?

Show key headers only | View raw

On 04/ 2/12 05:48 PM, Qi wrote:
> On 2012-4-2 1:24, Juha Nieminen wrote:
>> Qi<no@no.no>   wrote:
>>> int main(int argc, char * argv[])
>>> {
>>>          (void)argc;
>>>          (void)argv;
>>
>>     This seemed like nonsensical code because it does nothing. Then I realized
>> that it's an ugly hack to silence the compiler warning about unused
>> variables. That's not how you do it.
>
> Ugly? Maybe.
> But it makes a lot of sense to me.
>
> There is time that some parameters are not used. Such as implementing
> an interface, and the interface function just has extra parameters for
> flexibility.
>
> Though I can write "int main(int, char **)", I won't do it because
> I expect others may read my code and feel difficult to understand
> the function without the parameter name.

Then why don't you just write "int main()"?

> For example,
> int findSomeThing(int, int); // what's that? Don't know
> int findSomeThing(int beginIndex, int endIndex); // oh, find between
> // beginIndex, endIndex, but the function doesn't use them.
>
> Of course we can put the parameter name to declaration and omit
> in the definition, but then the reader needs to dig into the header
> only for parameters when he is reading the source code.

If the parameter isn't used (and named), why would the reader look for it?

> int main(int /*argc*/, char** /*argv*/) ?
> To me, it's more ugly and easier to misread than (void)argc.
> **? */? How may * and / there in one line?
>
> And I think "(void)argc" is well known for C++ developers, maybe
> I'm wrong?

Maybe, most people I know simply omit the name.

-- 
Ian Collins

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Any way to defer template function overloading? Qi <no@no.no> - 2012-04-01 10:05 +0800
  Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-01 16:06 +1200
    Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Qi <no@no.no> - 2012-04-01 13:53 +0800
  Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-04-01 17:24 +0000
    Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2012-04-02 00:40 +0200
      Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-02 11:02 +1200
      Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-04-02 05:29 +0000
    Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Qi <no@no.com> - 2012-04-02 13:48 +0800
      Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-02 17:53 +1200
        Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Qi <no@no.com> - 2012-04-02 13:57 +0800
          Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-04-02 18:12 +1200
            Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-04-02 15:32 +0900
      Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2012-04-02 14:58 +0900
      Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2012-04-02 10:11 +0000
        Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Qi <no@no.com> - 2012-04-02 19:04 +0800
          Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? Qi <no@no.com> - 2012-04-02 19:17 +0800
  Re: Any way to defer template function overloading? jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-02 14:41 +0000

csiph-web