kicad-developers team mailing list archive
-
kicad-developers team
-
Mailing list archive
-
Message #08614
Re: Using compiler specific c++ extensions
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 07:10:38AM -0400, Carl Rash wrote:
> There is a very good discussion of this here
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/370283/why-cant-i-have-a-non-integral-sta
> tic-const-member-in-a-class
Thanks, very interesting... substantially because you can't put a float in a template *and* they are of the same semantical category (const-expr). Just when they fixed the compile time evaluation rules (that's why gcc needs MPFR!).
Oh and I shiver at the tough of yet another 'constexpr' keyword: they should have added *another* meaning to static :X static const non-mutable fixed burned-in-stone variable *maybe* will be a good const definition:P:P or maybe a new keyword *dogma* which overrides the programmer's religious beliefs:D
C++ is becoming more and more bloated and unmanageable. And even more slow to compile...
/me wants defconst... these are *so* immutable that not even the compiler sees them (like C #define but keeping type informations)
--
Lorenzo Marcantonio
Logos Srl
Follow ups
References