Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!samsung!uunet!taumet!steve
From: steve@taumet.com (Stephen Clamage)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Overloaded operator dot?
Message-ID: <629@taumet.com>
Date: 21 Mar 91 17:45:32 GMT
References: <11152@jarthur.Claremont.EDU> <624@taumet.com> <12193@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Organization: Taumetric Corporation, San Diego
Lines: 23

jbuck@galileo.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck) writes:

>In article <624@taumet.com>, steve@taumet.com (Stephen Clamage) writes:
>|> Q3. What functionality will be added to the language which is not now
>|>     conveniently available?  (What problem does this solve?)

>The new functionality is the ability to have "smart references".  The
>semantics parallels the semantics for "smart pointers" obtained by overloading
>operator -> and should have the same restrictions.

Aha!  But is this in fact "new functionality"?  What is the difference
between a smart pointer and a smart reference in terms of the kinds of
programming you can do and the code you have to write to do it?  It was
not clear to the group looking into the issue that there was a
significant difference, or that it justified the added complexity in
the language.  On the other hand, it was not clear that the idea should
be rejected either.  That is why they recommended further study.

(As an aside, I am not part of the group investigating this issue, nor
do I have strong feelings about it either way.)
-- 

Steve Clamage, TauMetric Corp, steve@taumet.com