Jonathan Bromley wrote: > A further thought... > >> 5) if a parameter_port_list is specified by the extern class it >> shall be identical to the parameter_port_list specified in >> the class declaration. > [...] >> I don't mind adopting a stronger set of rules with respect >> to (4) and (5), namely that the form shall match exactly >> rather than saying "match if present". > > I think I would at this stage prefer to enforce exact match, > at least for the parameter_port_list. Otherwise it's > conceivable that > > extern class C; > > might be ambiguous, since it might represent implementation > of extern methods of the default specialisation. Even if > that is strictly impossible, the risk of confusion - and the > risk of conflict with future, different syntax extensions - > suggests we should err on the side of conservatism. Fair enough. Gord. -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Gordon Vreugdenhil 503-685-0808 Model Technology (Mentor Graphics) gordonv@model.com -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Tue Jun 26 06:54:02 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jun 26 2007 - 06:54:20 PDT