Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: We have a new standard!
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 14:52:31 -0500
Organization: None
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <vlml1v$2u6ja$4@dont-email.me>
References: <cone.1735849245.346442.281052.1000@ripper.email-scan.com>
 <vl8m0u$3t4v1$1@dont-email.me>
 <cone.1735909901.753978.294757.1000@ripper.email-scan.com>
 <vl8sfi$3u4fh$1@dont-email.me>
 <cone.1735919451.379621.297354.1000@ripper.email-scan.com>
 <vl9eq7$1n1d$1@dont-email.me>
 <cone.1735956395.711486.303344.1000@ripper.email-scan.com>
 <vlbte2$imdo$1@dont-email.me> <vlg4qr$1hinc$1@dont-email.me>
 <vljasv$27g6v$4@dont-email.me> <vljc9i$27uoh$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: OFeem1987@teleworm.us
Injection-Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2025 20:52:31 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="877d4b7afc70d075c59dcd091b97541d";
	logging-data="3086954"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/gLbY0/lXVqwqKvxUq19SF"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:GD5Q7H3DiPUCvCXnHmwl2zk6icY=
X-Face: 63n<76,LYJQ2m#'5YL#.T95xqyPiG`ffIP70tN+j"(&@6(4l\7uL)2+/-r0)/9SjZ`qw=
 Njn mr93Xrerx}aQG-Ap5IHn"xe;`5:pp"$RH>Kx_ngWw%c\+6qSg!q"41n2[.N/;Pu6q8?+Poz~e
 A9? $6_R7cm.l!s8]yfv7x+-FYQ|/k
X-Slrn: Why use anything else?
X-Mutt: The most widely-used MUA
X-User-Agent: Microsoft Outl00k, Usenet K00k Editions
Bytes: 3070

Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:

> On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 08:40:47 -0500
> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wibbled:
>>Muttley@DastardlyHQ.org wrote this post while blinking in Morse code:
>>
>>> On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 20:08:00 +0200
>>> Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> wibbled:
>>>>On 04.01.2025 04:06, Sam wrote:
>>>>> void my_algorithm(algorithm_info_t &) throws(AlgoThrownClasses)
>>>>
>>>>That's the first good idea from you in this discussion. I still do not 
>>>>see much point in exception specifications, but such a typedef would at 
>>>>least make life easier for me on this Alternate Earth.
>>>>
>>>>PS. Nowadays they prefer `using` instead of `typedef`.
>>>
>>> I never understood the point of that. Why not increase the semantic scope
>>> of "typedef" instead of having 2 keywords that in a lot of circumstances
>>> do the same thing?
>>
>>Because using is a nicer to read?
>
> Who knows. The C++ committee certainly has form on this - typename replaced 
> class in template definitions when they realised 10 years after everyone else
> that reusing class in that particular case was somewhat confusing.

Stroustrup in section 23.2 of his 4th edition C++ book notes that
these two are equivalent:

    template<typename X>
    template<class X>

but that for typename X, X need not be a class.


-- 
Telling the truth to people who misunderstand you is generally promoting
a falsehood, isn't it?
		-- A. Hope