On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Andrew Pinski <pins...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 11:32 AM, Shawn Landden <shawnland...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:36 PM, Andrew Pinski <pins...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Shawn Landden <shawnland...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> direct-declarator: >>>> ( type-qualifier[opt] type-specifier *[opt] identifier[opt] ) . >>>> function-definition >>>> >>>> >>>> call like so: >>>> >>>> >>>> type.foo(baz); >>>> typep->foo(baz); >>> >>> >>> Wait you are re-inventing C with classes and C++. >> This is still C, unlike C++. I was influenced by Go. > > > Have you read about C with classes and the history around C++? C with > classes was still a super-set of C in the first couple of years, only > later becoming C++ when it started to become a language in its own > rights. Again what is the difference between your ideas and C with > classes? I like Go using upper case to determine public/private, but otherwise yes, its basically the same. Interesting that I came to the same conclusion. Also, I would disagree with a mandatory constructor function. The advantage of the C with classes method is that there is only one place to look for function pointers, rather than having it a fallback namespace, the disadvantage is that it makes it seem that offsetof() will work. > > Thanks, > Andrew > >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Andrew >>> >>>> >>>> type automatically becomes first parameter, (when used as a function >>>> pointer) and as a pointer to if that was included in definition. if >>>> type is a typedef of void and not a pointer then parameters are passed >>>> the same. >>>> >>>> >>>> This would be implemented with function name mangling: >>>> >>>> >>>> __tf_type_identifier(...) >>>> >>>> >>>> example: >>>> >>>> >>>> struct foo { >>>> int a >>>> } >>>> >>>> int (struct foo *b).add(int f) { >>>> return b->a + f; >>>> } >>>> >>>> int main(void) { >>>> >>>> struct foo bar; >>>> >>>> >>>> baz.a = 4; >>>> >>>> return baz.add(6); >>>> >>>> } >>>> >>>> >>>> I have been hacking at the source, but it is far from functional. >>>> -- >>>> Liberty equality fraternity or death, >>>> >>>> Shawn Landden >>>> ChurchOfGit.com >> >> >> >> -- >> Liberty equality fraternity or death, >> >> Shawn Landden >> ChurchOfGit.com
-- Liberty equality fraternity or death, Shawn Landden ChurchOfGit.com