On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Matt Calabrese <rivorus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Matt Calabrese <rivorus@gmail.com> wrote:
All of these details can be worked out after I submit it for review, and at that point, pending it even gets accepted, if there is a strong opinion in one direction I will make changes, but as of right now I'd rather just get back to focusing on functionality.
Alright, I have an interesting way to handle checking arbitrary expression requirements for the automatically deduced result type, but I'm not sure it's standard.:It's actually kind of nasty, but I think it would work and it also has the side-effect of allowing users to pass a series of statements, including declarations, to "try" and "continue try", instead of a preprocessor sequence of expressions (though compilers can't handle it yet).
It also just occurred to me that if this solution works there is no need to separate "if" from "continue if", and "try" from "continue try". -- -Matt Calabrese