Re: Generic access type convention and aliasing

["Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)" <yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr>]

Le Tue, 07 May 2013 08:02:58 +0200, Yannick Duchêne (Hibou57)  
<yannick_duchene@yahoo.fr> a écrit:
> Implicit deference, even if it avoids direct use of the access member  
> (syntactic sugar, not added safety, although a good idea)

If it was a function return a view (either read, read/write or write),  
that would not be only syntactic sugar any‑more.

I forget too much about C++, so I will request help from C++ gurus if  
there are some here: I feel to remember something similar existed with  
C++, where a function could return an object by reference instead of  
returning a pointer to it. I am wrong or not? If I'm not wrong, I however  
don't remember if it was safe enough: did it allow to get a pointer from  
that returned reference? (if so, that's not safe and so not worth).

If the implicit deference could specify a discriminant only visible in the  
private part, that would be OK (the public declaration would just have to  
tell what the type is).

-- 
“Syntactic sugar causes cancer of the semi-colons.” [1]
“Structured Programming supports the law of the excluded muddle.” [1]
[1]: Epigrams on Programming — Alan J. — P. Yale University