From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11241 invoked by alias); 18 Nov 2004 17:14:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11202 invoked from network); 18 Nov 2004 17:13:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO boden.synopsys.com) (198.182.44.79) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 18 Nov 2004 17:13:54 -0000 Received: from mother.synopsys.com (mother.synopsys.com [146.225.100.171]) by boden.synopsys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7F57DDE3; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:13:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from piper.synopsys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mother.synopsys.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id JAA21792; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (from jbuck@localhost) by piper.synopsys.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id iAIHDqM27832; Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:13:52 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: piper.synopsys.com: jbuck set sender to Joe.Buck@synopsys.com using -f Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 17:57:00 -0000 From: Joe Buck To: Matt Austern Cc: Andrew Pinski , gcc mailing list Subject: Re: generalized lvalues Message-ID: <20041118091352.A24512@synopsys.com> References: <8AD5AEEF-3914-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com> <78169FF3-3916-11D9-AEB4-000A95D692F4@physics.uc.edu> <4D2CF60C-3919-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com> <20041117212847.A26376@synopsys.com> <68A0DBA9-3923-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <68A0DBA9-3923-11D9-8BD2-000A95BCF344@apple.com>; from austern@apple.com on Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 09:33:42PM -0800 X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00626.txt.bz2 On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 09:33:42PM -0800, Matt Austern wrote: > > I doubt if you will get the flood of questions you anticipate, because > > few people even knew that the extension was there. It is possible that > > someone has a production program that is not valid C++ that will now > > break, but if this happens we just tell them how to fix the program. > > I hope you're right. I take the pessimistic view that there are lots of > programmers who have no idea what the language definition is for > the language they're using, but just throw code at the compiler until > the compiler produces an executable that seems to work. It is true that there is a lot of this. However, in this particular case, assigning to a cast and expecting it to work isn't something that people just stumble on to accidentally.