C++0x Initialization Lists

Google Tech Talks
February 21, 2007

ABSTRACT

Getting initialization right is an important part of programming. Over the years, this has led to a mess of language facilities and techniques. This talk describes how C++0x (most likely) will address two issues: how to get a uniform syntax and semantics for all initialization and how to allow initialization by general lists. Obviously, people will want the solution to be really simple and completely compatible. As ever, the resolution is to be almost completely compatible and almost simple. This talk will describe sequence constructors, homogeneous and heterogeneous initializer lists, and (as far as time allows) fit generalized constant expressions,...

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• google
• howto
• initialization
• lists

[tpr712]

Bjarne is my biggest fan

[namelessonehr]

I also think he mixed up the Sick example...

[kaifroland]

@tpr712 Is Bjarne Stroustrup a fan of yours?

[xmichaelibertyx]

cool video

[Kungfuelmo0]

@tpr712 Why is he your biggest fan? Whats so great about you?

[captainsurrey]

@correaalf The explicit keyword should be placed before "Sick(double);" for the example to make sense.

[Ustus2001]

*

sick s = 2.1

[Ustus2001]

@correaalf

but this: sick = 2.1;

prints "sick(int)"

:)

[correaalf]

I agree. I don't know exactly what is his point near 21:20. But he is wrong I tried this, and printed "sick(double)".

struct sick{

sick(double){std::cout<<"sick(­double)"<<std::endl;}

explicit sick(int){std::cout<<"explicit sick(int)"<<std::endl;}

};

int main(){

sick s(2.1);

}

[RaiderRedSixBravo]

wow really borring

[aardbeias]

Indeed. Both gcc 4.4.0 and cl.exe (visual c++ 2009) both call the non-explicit double constructor