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.
>
> Aus
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
On Jan 3, 2018 2:44 PM, "nick" wrote:
On 2018-01
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
yo
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?
Snapshot gcc-6-20180103 is now available on
ftp://gcc.gnu.org/pub/gcc/snapshots/6-20180103/
and on various mirrors, see http://gcc.gnu.org/mirrors.html for details.
This snapshot has been generated from the GCC 6 SVN branch
with the following options: svn://gcc.gnu.org/svn/gcc/branches/gcc-6
Why would dont add it at GNU G++?
