The Artima Developer Community
Articles | News | Weblogs | Books | Forums
Artima Forums | Articles | Weblogs | Java Answers | News
Sponsored Link •

Artima Developer Spotlight Forum
The Removal of Concepts From C++0x

19 replies on 2 pages. Most recent reply: Jul 28, 2009 4:50 PM by Max Lybbert

Welcome Guest
  Sign In

Go back to the topic listing  Back to Topic List Click to reply to this topic  Reply to this Topic Click to search messages in this forum  Search Forum Click for a threaded view of the topic  Threaded View   
Previous Topic   Next Topic
Flat View: This topic has 19 replies on 2 pages [ « | 1 2 ]
Achilleas Margaritis

Posts: 674
Nickname: achilleas
Registered: Feb, 2005

Re: The Removal of Concepts From C++0x Posted: Jul 24, 2009 8:22 AM
Reply to this message Reply
Advertisement
> Concepts should allow a diagnostic such as
> "SortedVector<Foo> requires Foo to model the
> LesThanComparable concept" to be given in main(), rather
> than a few levels down in a specific member function.
> That would be one line of error output, not three or more.

The error I showed in the example would be given in main as well.

It does not matter if the error is 3 lines or 1 line, as long as the important line comes first.

John Zabroski

Posts: 272
Nickname: zbo
Registered: Jan, 2007

Re: The Removal of Concepts From C++0x Posted: Jul 27, 2009 8:55 PM
Reply to this message Reply
> > The major advantage of concepts is reduced coupling to
> > type hierarchies, a huge requirement for truly generic
> > programming.
>
> Go on.
>
> Cheers,
> Carson

I highly recommend Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1766: Generic Programming.

In particular, Fundamentals of Generic Programming by Dehnert and Stepanov.

I'm not going to write a ridiculously long rant about why it is so important, though. The literature is there. I am just going to point to it.

Max Lybbert

Posts: 314
Nickname: mlybbert
Registered: Apr, 2005

Re: The Removal of Concepts From C++0x Posted: Jul 28, 2009 1:00 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> From Kalev's article, as quoted above:
>
> As a compromise, the committee decided to pursue the
> refinement of Concepts while leaving the Standard Library
> unconceptualized for the time being.
>
> Really? I see lots of concepts in the October 2008
> working paper, ...
> Since then successive WPs have "conceptualized" additional
> parts of the library as well.

And with this change the committee is reverting to an earlier version of the standard ("We won’t have a de-conceptized working draft for the post-meeting mailing, two weeks after the meeting, but should have one soon after that. ... Recall that, until last September, we had a complete draft of C++0x features specified entirely without the use of concepts. And many of the uses of concepts in the draft standard library were just replacements of preexisting non-concepts wording or implicit requirements ... and will just revert to their previous wording or disappear back into implicitness." http://herbsutter.wordpress.com/2009/07/21/trip-report/ ), because without concepts the portions of the standard that refer to concepts make no sense.

Jonathan Wakely

Posts: 14
Nickname: jwakely
Registered: Jul, 2009

Re: The Removal of Concepts From C++0x Posted: Jul 28, 2009 2:06 AM
Reply to this message Reply
> And with this change the committee is reverting to an
> earlier version of the standard

Right, I was simply pointing out the misinformation in Kalev's article: the library categorically was using concepts in most places, and the feature wasn't pulled because it had been rejected for the library.

Max Lybbert

Posts: 314
Nickname: mlybbert
Registered: Apr, 2005

Re: The Removal of Concepts From C++0x Posted: Jul 28, 2009 4:50 PM
Reply to this message Reply
> > And with this change the committee is reverting to an
> > earlier version of the standard
>
> Right, I was simply pointing out the misinformation in
> Kalev's article: the library categorically was
> using concepts in most places, and the feature wasn't
> pulled because it had been rejected for the library.

Fair enough.

Flat View: This topic has 19 replies on 2 pages [ « | 1  2 ]
Topic: Two-Way Data Binding in Flex 4 Previous Topic   Next Topic Topic: Brian Frank on Fan versus Scala
Sponsored Links


Google
  Web Artima.com   

Copyright © 1996-2019 Artima, Inc. All Rights Reserved. - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use