Re: request for new a syntactic design for C/C++.

2006-07-13 Thread Vladimir 'Yu' Stepanov
Mike Stump wrote: On Jul 9, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Vladimir 'Yu' Stepanov wrote: I would like to offer one expansion for C/C++. Did you just reinvent downcasting in C++? If so, C++ already has that feature!? As for C, C, I'd claim C already has that feature[1], you merely have to put in a #def

Re: request for new a syntactic design for C/C++.

2006-07-13 Thread Vladimir 'Yu' Stepanov
Ian Lance Taylor wrote: "Vladimir 'Yu' Stepanov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Current syntax C/C++: load_ptr = typeof(load_ptr)(((char *)init_ptr) - \ offsetof(typeof(init_ptr), field); The offered syntax: &load_ptr->field = init_ptr; Interesting idea, but C/C++ p

Re: request for new a syntactic design for C/C++.

2006-07-10 Thread Mike Stump
On Jul 9, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Vladimir 'Yu' Stepanov wrote: I would like to offer one expansion for C/C++. Did you just reinvent downcasting in C++? If so, C++ already has that feature!? As for C, C, I'd claim C already has that feature[1], you merely have to put in a #define into your lib

Re: request for new a syntactic design for C/C++.

2006-07-10 Thread Ian Lance Taylor
"Vladimir 'Yu' Stepanov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Current syntax C/C++: > > load_ptr = typeof(load_ptr)(((char *)init_ptr) - \ >offsetof(typeof(init_ptr), field); > > The offered syntax: > > &load_ptr->field = init_ptr; Interesting idea, but C/C++ programmers expect th