[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-12-07 00:16 -------

I still want this. 

Someday...


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494

[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[machata at post dot cz]

------- Comment #4 from machata at post dot cz  2005-12-09 12:54 -------
Created an attachment (id=10444)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=10444&action=view)
Implementation of condensed nested namespaces definition, includes testcase.

I sent an email with some comments to gcc-patches:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-12/msg00666.html


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494

[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-12-14 17:16 -------

I'm encouraged by this work!!! Great news.

The reason this would be useful is that then it would be possible to use a
single macro to represent both scope and namespace. Ie, 

#define ACTIVE_SCOPE

works for

namespace ACTIVE_SCOPE
{
}

and explicit qualifications like

ACTIVE_SCOPE::obj;

Anyway.

-benjamin


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494

[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[gdr at integrable-solutions dot net]

------- Comment #6 from gdr at integrable-solutions dot net  2005-12-15 03:40 -------
Subject: Re:  condensed nested namespaces

"bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:

| ------- Comment #5 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-12-14 17:16 -------
| 
| I'm encouraged by this work!!! Great news.
| 
| The reason this would be useful is that then it would be possible to use a
| single macro to represent both scope and namespace. Ie, 
| 
| #define ACTIVE_SCOPE
| 
| works for
| 
| namespace ACTIVE_SCOPE
| {
| }
| 
| and explicit qualifications like
| 
| ACTIVE_SCOPE::obj;
| 
| Anyway.

I see what you mean.  However, as ever, macro-based tehcniques just
don't play nicely with othe scope rules.  

When I read the code, I don't want to be deceived.  When I see

    namespace ACTIVE_SCOPE { /* blah blah */ }

I really think of a named scope.  Later, when I see
ACTIVE_SCOPE::obj, I really think of the obj found in ACTIVE_SCOPE 
through usual rules.  However, if ACTIVE_SCOPE is #defined to nothing,
then that breaks down -- the obj found is not the one from the unnamed
namespace through usual rules.  
So. while I believe this work can be useful, I'm not convinced that
the macro-based techniques make a case for the extension that would
require a different set of lookup rules.

-- Gaby


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494

[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[redi at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494

Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |DUPLICATE

--- Comment #7 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Something like this is in the C++17 WP

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 65047 ***

[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-05-10 17:49 -------
Confirmed.

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|                            |1
   Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00         |2005-05-10 17:49:19
               date|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494

[Bug c++/21494] condensed nested namespaces

[bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-05-10 15:44 -------
Created an attachment (id=8853)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=8853&action=view)
proposal


At Kona, this seemed uncontraversial.

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21494