3 ms·
The proposal is for operator => I think it’s not an April Fool’s joke, but this looks awfully confusable with >=.
by amluto 3y ago
The proposal is for operator =>
I think it’s not an April Fool’s joke, but this looks awfully confusable with >=.
- gary_0 3y agoAnd confusable with lambda/function and pattern matching operators in other languages. Imagine only being an occasional C++ user, seeing =>, and thinking they added terse lambdas! You'd be in for a [big]<T>(){disappointment;}.
- gpderetta 3y agoThat's way too terse. You forgot 'mutable' and 'return' :(
- humanrebar 3y agoYeah, I'd lean towards a more obvious spelling, but most bikeshedding conversations bore me very quickly.
- amluto 3y ago!(a) || (b) It’s a very obvious spelling :)
- naruhodo 3y agoPronounce it "or else", as in p or_else q. Hell, even re-using the else keyword mid-expression would work. Or you know, the ultimate in simplicity: don't implement this operator at all. I agree with the other commenter that => would be better used for lambdas.