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

Bo Thorsen bo at vikingsoft.eu
Wed Dec 30 11:01:34 CET 2015

Den 29-12-2015 kl. 18:47 skrev Matthew Woehlke:
> On 2015-12-26 20:17, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> And what is hard to parse for humans? The "char* p,q" "issue"? That's a
>> formatting bug then, this ought to be written "char *p, q", which makes it
>> very clear what is going on.
> That's... debatable. Personally, I dislike combining names and type
> information. And it doesn't always work out so nicely. What, for
> example, is the type of 'q' here?:
>    char const* const *p, q;
> Explicit pointer/reference types and multiple declarations should simply
> not appear in the same statement¹. Period.

This is getting quite off-topic, even for this thread.

Bo Thorsen,
Director, Viking Software.

Viking Software
Qt and C++ developers for hire

More information about the Development mailing list