public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "james dot kanze at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/29834] g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:10:00 -0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20061115101027.25732.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-29834-9635@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> ------- Comment #4 from james dot kanze at gmail dot com 2006-11-15 10:10 ------- Subject: Re: g++ thinks it is a declaration when it cannot be On 15 Nov 2006 01:59:33 -0000, bangerth at dealii dot org <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > (Note that in the actual code, Doh was > > boost::mutex::scoped_lock. And I fear that using > > boost::mutex::scoped_lock like this is becoming a widespread > > idiom.) > Ugh, this isn't an easy to read idiom... Not sure I like it myself. It has two advantages: you don't have to invent a name for a variable that you are never going to use, and you don't have to add braces to limit the scope of the lock. Very meager advantages, IMHO: it doesn't bother me to just throw in any short name (e.g. 'l') in such cases, and if the function is large enough to require the extra braces, it's probably too large and complicated anyway. But I'm not the only programmer in the world, and some people seem to actually like it. And... I'll use it too, in quick hacks in throw-away code. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29834
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-15 10:10 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2006-11-14 16:36 [Bug c++/29834] New: " james dot kanze at gmail dot com 2006-11-14 21:33 ` [Bug c++/29834] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-15 1:59 ` bangerth at dealii dot org 2006-11-15 10:05 ` james dot kanze at gmail dot com 2006-11-15 10:10 ` james dot kanze at gmail dot com [this message] [not found] <bug-29834-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> 2012-10-11 21:54 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-07-02 10:25 ` ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com 2013-07-02 10:49 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-07-02 12:10 ` ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com 2013-07-02 15:04 ` james.kanze at gmail dot com 2013-07-02 17:16 ` manu at gcc dot gnu.org 2013-07-02 21:38 ` ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com 2013-07-02 21:48 ` ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com 2013-07-13 1:53 ` ace.of.zerosync at gmail dot com 2024-02-07 17:36 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org 2024-02-07 17:57 ` mpolacek at gcc dot gnu.org
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=20061115101027.25732.qmail@sourceware.org \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).