Re: initializer list type deduction rules

From	Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: initializer list type deduction rules
Date	2022-08-12 14:34 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<td5odj$15dk$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(7 earlier) <c353b6c3-b434-40df-97b1-44484c668958n@googlegroups.com> <td52rd$7pi$1@gioia.aioe.org> <72e2232b-d54f-4bf9-b6e9-9d8a76ff1489n@googlegroups.com> <td5b51$1mtd$1@gioia.aioe.org> <4779f0d4-e6a8-4f08-8bf9-67563de04faan@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 04:54:47 -0700 (PDT)
=?UTF-8?B?w5bDtiBUaWli?= <ootiib@hot.ee> wrote:
>On Friday, 12 August 2022 at 13:48:18 UTC+3, Mut...@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 12 Aug 2022 03:38:14 -0700 (PDT) 
>> =?UTF-8?B?w5bDtiBUaWli?= <oot...@hot.ee> wrote: 
>> >On Friday, 12 August 2022 at 11:26:37 UTC+3, Mut...@dastardlyhq.com wrote: 
>> >> >Majority are probably still indifferent. What I have or haven't done
>ever 
>> >is 
>> >> >even less relevant to their opinion about usefulness of grep for finding 
>
>> >> >aliases 
>> >> >in code-base. 
>> >> 
>> >> For majority read "windows devs". I'm not interested in how they develop
>or 
>> >> what requirements they have. There was however a clear requirement for
>not 
>> >> overloading a keyword yet again with the committee ignored. 
>> > 
>> >That is just expressing some kind of weird bigotry about widespread
>operating 
>> >system. Business is not about whatever prejudice or religion, leave that to
>> 
>> Neither should language development. They could have extended typedefs 
>> functionality but they chose to overload using instead. Even from an english 
>
>> semantic viewpoint the word "using" in a typedef context is illogical. 
>
>You did not explain how you would extend typedef to define alias templates.

I've already asked if there's something magical about the word "using". 

typedef <var> = 

could use a different syntax to normal typedef but at least it would be the
same keyword.

>AFAIK no one was capable to come out with good idea how. So your criticism
>is meaningless. As that issue was already explained  in this thread it looks
>like wilfully non-constructive nonsense.

Which is your usual opinion if you disagree with someone. Like a lot of people
on this group you seem to believe your opinion is the only correct one.

>> They're not inadequate, they work fine particularly for remote working which 
>
>> most IDEs are not good at or can't do at all unless via RDP or similar.
>
>In discussion of CLion? CLion supports full remote mode, windows
>subsystem for linux, remote debug and remote gdb server. With todays
>latency and bandwidth of net who doesn't want CLion could just bluntly
>use operating system tools for remote desktop without problems.

It writing in fucking java so you can shove that POS where the sun doesn't 
shine. I don't need an IDE using gigabytes of memory just to edit and compile.
I could use Eclipse for that.

Also in a previous job I had to remote debug embedded linux systems running
on a low powered ARM with < 50M of memory. Let me know how I'd have done that 
using clion.

>All that is rarely needed as most actual development goes using
>distributed code repositories (free are market leaders) and continuous

LOL :) Oh you really don't have a clue do you Mr Desktop developer.

Thread

initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-09 07:54 +0000
  Re: initializer list type deduction rules Bo Persson <bo@bo-persson.se> - 2022-08-09 10:43 +0200
  Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-09 09:00 -0700
    Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-09 16:06 +0000
      Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-10 02:32 +0000
        Re: initializer list type deduction rules Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-08-10 09:11 +0300
          Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-10 06:57 +0000
        Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-10 07:31 +0000
      Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-10 00:40 -0700
        Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-10 07:55 +0000
          Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-10 01:13 -0700
            Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-10 08:21 +0000
              Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-10 11:13 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-12 08:26 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-12 03:38 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-12 10:48 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-12 04:54 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-12 14:34 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-12 08:34 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-12 15:57 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-12 09:16 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-13 09:35 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-13 09:44 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-14 11:12 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-08-12 14:58 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-12 08:59 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-12 16:11 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-08-12 16:44 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-12 12:08 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-08-12 19:58 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2022-08-12 16:42 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-08-13 18:14 +0200
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-14 11:06 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-08-15 11:34 +0200
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-15 19:03 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-08-15 21:23 +0200
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules red floyd <no.spam.here@its.invalid> - 2022-08-15 13:51 -0700
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-16 19:16 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-08-21 22:23 +0300
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2022-08-22 08:08 +0200
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2022-08-22 11:37 +0300
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-22 10:23 +0000
          Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-11 06:24 +0000
            Re: initializer list type deduction rules Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-08-11 16:37 +0100
              Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-11 20:12 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2022-08-12 00:09 +0100
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-12 11:51 +0000
            Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-12 08:29 +0000
              Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-12 12:08 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Muttley@dastardlyhq.com - 2022-08-12 14:37 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2022-08-12 15:01 +0000
                Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-15 06:04 +0000
  Re: initializer list type deduction rules Andrey Tarasevich <andreytarasevich@hotmail.com> - 2022-08-09 16:08 -0700
    Re: initializer list type deduction rules Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2022-08-10 02:34 +0000

csiph-web