
16 Jul
2010
16 Jul
'10
2:46 a.m.
On 07/15/2010 06:48 PM, Andrew Sutton wrote:
The class is called "pointer... plus bits". If the abstraction isn't at least a little bit pointer-like, then the name of the data type is duplicitous at best. I think that some of the suggestions treat lightly the attachment that programmers have to the meanings of names.
But if you don't at least provide a boolean cast and a dereference operator, then I don't think you should be using "pointer" in the name of the class.
Meh, you could call it pointer_int_pair, and nobody would complain about the "pointer" in the name. (PointerIntPair is LLVM's version of this.) Sebastian