David,
Oh! Well, it doesn't have to be called self. :-) It could be __self__
or whatever would be fine. I see C99 has __FUNC__ for the current
function name used in strings. But, I was thinking more of an actual
reference to the current function as a function entity, sort of like a
name substitution.
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
On 06/14/2012 01:08 PM, David Malcolm wrote:
FWIW "self" today is a perfectly good variable name, and practically all
C and C++ code that interacts with Python (including the C
implementation of Python itself) uses "self" to name variables
throughout: many thousands of projects, many millions of lines of code.
Having this snatched away as a keyword under some compiler settings
would be a major PITA.
On Thu, 2012-06-14 at 12:53 -0400, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
Ian,
I was thinking C and C++.
int myclass::foo(int a)
{
// recursion
self(a + 1);
}
Just out of curiosity, why wouldn't it be accepted back into mainline?
Thanks for your help. :-)
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
On 06/14/2012 12:48 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
"Rick C. Hodgin"<foxmuldrs...@yahoo.com> writes:
How hard would it be to implement a "self" keyword extension which
references the contextual function name wherein it was referenced?
int foo(int a)
{
// recursion
self(a + 1);
}
int food(int a)
{
// recursion
self(a + 1);
}
Obviously not a useful example, but demonstrates that to call each
function it's in again that it can be done without knowing the
function name.
I assume you are asking about C? It would be easy to implement. The
compiler always know what function it is compiling. But I don't think
the extension would be accepted back into GCC mainline.
Ian
