> On Nov 3, 2013, at 9:10 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@google.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 8:49 PM, <pins...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >>> On Nov 3, 2013, at 8:28 PM, Maxim Kuvyrkov <ma...@kugelworks.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am considering a project to add Apple's blocks [*] extension to GCC. I >>> am looking at adding blocks support to C, C++ and Obj-C/C++ front-ends. >> >> What benefits does blocks have over nested functions in C and over lambas in >> C++? I think it is wrong to add another extension if only to be compatible >> with clang. I also think the blocks extension are less useful than nested >> functions and lambas. The question really should be why support something >> which has no advantage to them to what is already existing. I think it was >> wrong for apple to add them in the first place. > > Clang's blocks are more powerful than GCC's nested functions, because > blocks may be placed on the heap, and therefore returned from a > function.
Actually I think it is less powerful since it is a copy rather than a reference. Then again lambas can be do both. > > Ian
