[Development] RFC: more liberal 'auto' rules?

Marc Mutz marc.mutz at kdab.com
Mon Dec 7 14:05:38 CET 2015

On Monday 07 December 2015 12:23:41 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 10:29:09PM +0100, Marc Mutz wrote:
> > On Friday 04 December 2015 19:06:51 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> > > it's not that anyone is confused, it's that your "aside" was
> > > inherently flawed: variables in python are dynamically typed, so the
> > > suggestion that they are "auto" in any way related to c++ makes no
> > > sense whatsoever. my response aimed merely at showing that even your
> > > little "joke" was off.
> > 
> > Again: I was referring to the omission of any form of type name when
> > declaring variables. That Python is _also_ dynamically typed is
> > correct, but irrelevant.
> then maybe you want to explain how you want to implement auto
> *everywhere* without going dynamic. until you provide a credible answer
> to that, your "aside" is patently irrelevant. hint: c# type inference
> does *not* provide that answer.

I have explained it as good as I can. If you can or do not want to understand, 
then I'm sorry that I cannot explain it so you understand.


Marc Mutz <marc.mutz at kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt Experts

More information about the Development mailing list