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

Alejandro Exojo suy at badopi.org
Sun Dec 27 23:05:38 CET 2015

El Sunday 27 December 2015, Kevin Kofler escribió:
> I consider the C declarator syntax just fine, it is very intuitive and has 
> served us well for 26 years, so I don't see a need to change it.

That some things have served up well for some time, that doesn't mean we can't 
find better things (either to complement, or completely replace the old ones). 
That doesn't mean the AAA style is better just because it's new, of course. I 
just state no opinion. But your justification is wrong.
> Implicit narrowing conversions are a feature.

const qlonglong pi = 3.141592653589793238462643383;

That compiles and runs without warnings or errors. A line exactly like this 
ended up in a real application for some alpha version. I don't like this 
feature at all, and I'm glad there is a way to guard you against it (I might 
not like how it has to be done yet, but there are good reasons for wanting to 
avoid this feature).

Alex (a.k.a. suy) | GPG ID 0x0B8B0BC2
http://barnacity.net/ | http://disperso.net

More information about the Development mailing list