Re: Re: [C++14] Admit C++ keywords as literal suffixes.

2013-06-18 Thread 3dw4rd
On 06/18/13, Jonathan Wakely wrote: On 18 June 2013 07:04, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: > I understand that the literal operators for complex numbers for C++14 > faltered at least in part because of the perceived ugliness of the float > operator: > > constexpr complex > operator"" i_f(); // fugl

Re: [C++14] Admit C++ keywords as literal suffixes.

2013-06-18 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 18 June 2013 08:35, Andreas Schwab wrote: > According to 2.14.8#10 this is ill-formed. It's ill-formed for users to define it, but not ill-formed according to the language grammar, and the compiler would need to implement that grammar if operator""if gets added to the standard library (which co

Re: [C++14] Admit C++ keywords as literal suffixes.

2013-06-18 Thread Jonathan Wakely
On 18 June 2013 07:04, Ed Smith-Rowland wrote: > I understand that the literal operators for complex numbers for C++14 > faltered at least in part because of the perceived ugliness of the float > operator: > > constexpr complex > operator"" i_f(); // fugly > > The obvious choice > constexpr compl

Re: [C++14] Admit C++ keywords as literal suffixes.

2013-06-18 Thread Andreas Schwab
Ed Smith-Rowland <3dw...@verizon.net> writes: > constexpr complex > operator"" if(); According to 2.14.8#10 this is ill-formed. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, sch...@suse.de GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 "And now for something completely diffe