December 2003 - Posts

• Conversion Operators

  What’s Different in the Revised Language Definition? Conversion Operators       Speaking of that grotty feel to the language, having to write op_Implicit to specify a conversion just didn’t feel like C++ in the T1 language design. For example, Read More... Posted Wednesday, December 17, 2003 12:25 PM by slippman | 0 Comments

• Declaring Delegates and Events

  What’s Different in the Revised Language Definition? Delegates and Events       The only change to the declarations of a delegate and a trivial event is the removal of the double underscore, as in the following sample. As these things go, Read More... Posted Monday, December 15, 2003 10:42 AM by slippman | 3 Comments

• Declaring Indexed Properties

  What’s Different in the Revised Language Definition? Declaring Indexed Properties     In an earlier entry on operator overloading, I showed the following construction, in which the x-coordinate of a managed reference Vector class object is directly Read More... Posted Friday, December 12, 2003 12:27 PM by slippman | 2 Comments

• Property Declarations

  What s Different in the Revised Language Definition? Declaring Properties In the original language design, each set or get property accessor is specified as an independent member function. The declaration of each method is prefixed with the __property Read More... Posted Thursday, December 11, 2003 2:39 PM by slippman | 7 Comments

• Implicit Boxing

  What s Different in the Revised Language Definition? Implicit Boxing     Ok, so we reversed ourselves. In politics, that would likely loose us an election. In language design, it means that we imposed a philosophical position in lieu of practical Read More... Posted Wednesday, December 10, 2003 12:35 PM by slippman | 11 Comments

• Declaration and Use of Overloaded Operators

  What s Different in the Revised Language Definition? Support for Operator Overloading     Perhaps the most baffling aspect of the original language design is its support for operator overloading or rather, its effective absence. As an outsider, Read More... Posted Tuesday, December 09, 2003 12:36 PM by slippman | 3 Comments

• The Declaration of a Managed Enum

  What s Different in the Revised Language Definition? The Declaration of a Managed Enum Type   The original .NET enum declaration is preceded by the __value keyword. For example,   // the original syntax public __value enum e1 : unsigned short Read More... Posted Monday, December 08, 2003 12:52 PM by slippman | 2 Comments

• The Declaration of a Managed Class

  What s Different in the Revised Language Definition? The Declaration of a Managed Class Type     In the original language definition, a reference class type is prefaced with the __gc keyword, where the gc is an acronym for garbage collected. Read More... Posted Friday, December 05, 2003 12:35 PM by slippman | 3 Comments

• Removal of the __ Keyword Prefix

  What s Different in the Revised Language Definition? Removal of the  _ _ Keyword Prefix One general transformation of the language between the original and revised language design is the removal of the double-underscore from all keywords. For example, Read More... Posted Wednesday, December 03, 2003 10:25 AM by slippman | 2 Comments

• Finishing the Hat

  Finishing the Hat (^) Once it became clear that support for .NET within C++ represented a distinct programming paradigm, it followed that the language needed to be extended to provide both a first class coding experience for the user, and Read More... Posted Tuesday, December 02, 2003 5:52 PM by slippman | 4 Comments

• The Revised C++ Language Design - Part 2

  The Revised C++ Language Design Supporting .NET -- Part 2 The fundamental design choice in supporting the .NET reference type within C++ is to decide whether to remain within the existing language, or to extend the language, thereby breaking with the Read More... Posted Monday, December 01, 2003 1:42 PM by slippman | 4 Comments