[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
The new Constructor Bomb stuff
- To: <tribble>
- Subject: The new Constructor Bomb stuff
- From: Mark S. Miller <mark>
- Date: Fri, 10 Aug 90 19:16:45 PDT
- Cc: <ravi@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <xtech@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <Eric>,48 PDT <9008101958.AA26936@xanadu>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 90 12:58:48 PDT
From: tribble (Eric Dean Tribble)
...
I think this can easily be made to work. If the translator encounters
a default construction *statement* rather than embedded as an
expression, it can output the appropriate translation. Is there any
reason not to provide this support?
Yes. One should generally use pseudo-constructors. The current set
of abstractions gently encourage pseudo-constructors. An abstraction
for a construction *statement* makes no sense inside a pseudo-
constructor.
P.S. I don't feel strongly about this either way.