On 2018-01-03 07:52 PM, Austin T wrote: > By nested functions, I'm assuming that means raw function definitions that > are valid inside a temporary scope of a function. If I'm not mistaken, > they're equivalent to C++ lambda expressions but just written in a syntactic > sugar syntax. > > Austin >
That's the same thing actually if your going to name your lambda. What are the advantages of this newer syntax or feature. Do you have any examples? Nick > On Jan 3, 2018 2:44 PM, "nick" <xerofo...@gmail.com > <mailto:xerofo...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > On 2018-01-03 06:05 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > > On 3 January 2018 at 21:13, Alexsandr Yvarov wrote: > >> Why would dont add it at GNU G++? > > > > Aren't C++ lambda expressions more powerful and flexible? > > > > It depends actually, lambdas are consider the C++ standard of this. I am > wondering what > you mean Alexsandir and what is your use case as lambdas tryto solve this > for most use > cases of antonymous and nested functions. What are the requirements if > any that lambdas > don't meant and have you looked at the C++14/17 standard for them if your > compiler > supports it. > > What do you mean by nested functions actually as that means a lot > of things in compiler or language development. > > Cheers, > Nick > >
