------=_Part_3138_29704902.1366252419305
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Instead of telling people what is the entry point, when to use which form,
we could simply write program like this:
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
entry{
    cout << "Hello World!" << endl;
}
It's self explaining and no one need to confuse who called function main,
why main can't call itself, why compiler don't complain when the return
statement is missing.
If someone need the (int argc, char** argv), we provide a function
get_cmd(). And vendors don't need to invent their own main, they just
provide the corresponding API.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_3138_29704902.1366252419305
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size: 13px;">In=
stead of telling people what is the entry point, when to use which form, we=
 could simply write program like this:&nbsp;</span><br></font></div><div><f=
ont face=3D"trebuchet ms, sans-serif" color=3D"#000000">#include&lt;iostrea=
m&gt;</font></div><div><font face=3D"trebuchet ms, sans-serif"><font color=
=3D"#0000ff">using namespace </font><font color=3D"#000000">std;</font></fo=
nt></div><div><font face=3D"trebuchet ms, sans-serif"><font color=3D"#0000f=
f">entry</font>{</font></div><div><font face=3D"trebuchet ms, sans-serif">&=
nbsp; &nbsp; cout &lt;&lt; "Hello World!" &lt;&lt; endl;</font></div><div><=
font face=3D"trebuchet ms, sans-serif">}</font></div><div><font face=3D"ver=
dana, sans-serif">It's self explaining and no one need to confuse who calle=
d function main, why main can't call itself, why compiler don't complain wh=
en the return statement is missing.</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana,=
 sans-serif">If someone need the (int argc, char** argv), we provide a func=
tion get_cmd(). And vendors don't need to invent their own main, they just =
provide the&nbsp;corresponding&nbsp;API.</font></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_3138_29704902.1366252419305--

.

------=_Part_479_27008897.1366445807154
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Whilst in principle, it would be nice if this were cleaned up, the simple
fact is that the semantics of varying entry points are well-known and
understood, and they do not change. Introducing a keyword for this is also
silly.

Since additional entry points are implementation-defined, the Standard
cannot define what to do about them. If you don't like these entry points,
complain to the vendors who have issued them. The Committee has no power in
this regard.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_479_27008897.1366445807154
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Whilst in principle, it would be nice if this were cleaned up, the simple f=
act is that the semantics of varying entry points are well-known and unders=
tood, and they do not change. Introducing a keyword for this is also silly.=
<div><br></div><div>Since additional entry points are implementation-define=
d, the Standard cannot define what to do about them. If you don't like thes=
e entry points, complain to the vendors who have issued them. The Committee=
 has no power in this regard.</div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_479_27008897.1366445807154--

.

------=_Part_392_14938380.1366448991012
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

It's not well-known and understood by the novices. Scaring them do no good
to C++ because we need new blood. And introducing a new keyword for this is
completely harmless. Have you ever saw a user defined identifier used this
way:

*identifier {*
*//*
*}*
*
*
I bet the answer is never. entry can be a contextual keyword and no one
will be hurt.

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 4:16:47 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:
>
> Whilst in principle, it would be nice if this were cleaned up, the simple
> fact is that the semantics of varying entry points are well-known and
> understood, and they do not change. Introducing a keyword for this is also
> silly.
>
> Since additional entry points are implementation-defined, the Standard
> cannot define what to do about them. If you don't like these entry points,
> complain to the vendors who have issued them. The Committee has no power in
> this regard.
>

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_392_14938380.1366448991012
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">It's not well-known and understood by th=
e novices. Scaring them do no good to C++ because we need&nbsp;new blood. A=
nd&nbsp;introducing a new keyword for this is completely harmless. Have you=
 ever saw a user&nbsp;defined identifier used this way:</font><div><font fa=
ce=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><br></font><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-seri=
f"><i>identifier {</i></font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">=
<i>//</i></font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><i>}</i></fon=
t></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><i><br></i></font></div><di=
v><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><font color=3D"#000000">I bet the answ=
er is never. </font><font color=3D"#0000ff">entry </font>can be a contextua=
l keyword and no one will be hurt.&nbsp;</font><br><br>On Saturday, April 2=
0, 2013 4:16:47 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-lef=
t: 1ex;">Whilst in principle, it would be nice if this were cleaned up, the=
 simple fact is that the semantics of varying entry points are well-known a=
nd understood, and they do not change. Introducing a keyword for this is al=
so silly.<div><br></div><div>Since additional entry points are implementati=
on-defined, the Standard cannot define what to do about them. If you don't =
like these entry points, complain to the vendors who have issued them. The =
Committee has no power in this regard.</div></blockquote></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_392_14938380.1366448991012--

.

------=_Part_622_8322637.1366460033416
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords
sucks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody
will be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper
in Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are
now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone
because vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example,
Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather
than needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there
is no *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this
goes through compared to in the existing system.

There is nothing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses
implementation-defined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage
implementations from offering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can
do about this.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_622_8322637.1366460033416
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords su=
cks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody will =
be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper in Com=
mittee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are now *eve=
n more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone because=
 vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example, Window=
s already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather than =
needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there is no=
 *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this goes t=
hrough compared to in the existing system.<div><br></div><div>There is noth=
ing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses implementation-de=
fined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage implementations from of=
fering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can do about this.</div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_622_8322637.1366460033416--

.

------=_Part_547_18181557.1366468319379
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

    I don't know why you are so angry. And I don't see any "hurt" you say
are true.
    I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more
novice friendly.
    Contextual keywords do have their power.
    I'm wasting the precious time of the committee? I hope you know what
you say.
    "*even more* flavors of entry point"?  It take weeks for the novice to
understand the main function. For experienced programmer, ten flavors of
entry point won't waste them one minute. When you starts to lean, you don't
need to care anything about the old entry. when you starts to work, it's
just another deprecated API.
    Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be. You
know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't want
touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:
>
> Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords
> sucks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody
> will be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper
> in Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are
> now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone
> because vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example,
> Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather
> than needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there
> is no *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this
> goes through compared to in the existing system.
>
> There is nothing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses
> implementation-defined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage
> implementations from offering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can
> do about this.
>

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_547_18181557.1366468319379
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; I don't know why you =
are so angry. And I don't see any "hurt" you say are true.&nbsp;</font></di=
v><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size: 13px;">=
&nbsp; &nbsp; I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make =
C++ more novice friendly.</span></font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sa=
ns-serif"><span style=3D"font-size: 13px;">&nbsp; &nbsp; C</span><span styl=
e=3D"font-size: 13px;">ontextual keywords do have their power.</span></font=
></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size: 13=
px;">&nbsp; &nbsp; I'm wasting the p</span>recious time of the<span style=
=3D"font-size: 13px;">&nbsp;committee? I hope you know what you say.</span>=
</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-si=
ze: 13px;">&nbsp; &nbsp; "*even more*&nbsp;</span>flavors<span style=3D"fon=
t-size: 13px;">&nbsp;of entry point"? &nbsp;It take weeks for the novice to=
 understand the main function. For e</span>xperienced programmer, ten&nbsp;=
flavors&nbsp;of entry point won't waste them one minute. When you starts to=
 lean, you don't need to care anything about the old entry. when you starts=
 to work, it's just another deprecated API.</font></div><div><font face=3D"=
verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; Again I don't care about legacy code. If=
 it's not crack, let it be. You know what my friend said when I advice them=
 to learn C++. "No, I don't want touch something that even harder than Java=
.." You want C++ die with you?</font></div><br>On Saturday, April 20, 2013 8=
:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"ma=
rgin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">=
Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords su=
cks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody will =
be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper in Com=
mittee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are now *eve=
n more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone because=
 vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example, Window=
s already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather than =
needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there is no=
 *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this goes t=
hrough compared to in the existing system.<div><br></div><div>There is noth=
ing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses implementation-de=
fined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage implementations from of=
fering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can do about this.</div></b=
lockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_547_18181557.1366468319379--

.

------=_Part_28_30344940.1366470806711
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

If somebody needs weeks to understand the main function, then he should
consider another hobby/career. "Where do I put my code?" "Put it in `int
main()`, it's a special entry function." "Ok, I get it." [ few minutes, he
wants command line arguments ] "Hey, but how do I get program arguments?"
"Here, do it this way: it gives you argument count and an array of
arguments." "Oh, that's sweet. Thanks." - that's the whole deal for anybody
I'd like to ever be considered when creating professional language
standards.

Java's entry point is NOT easier than C++'s. Compare `public static void
main` with `int main`, and compare the fact you need to put it in a class
with a free function. Also, if someone wants something "easy", he shall not
touch C++ in any way and we shouldn't even consider their existence when
working on the standard.

One thing I wish he had for the entry point was another standard signature
- namely, vector of strings. I do know that it is trivial to construct a
vector out of argc and argv, but that would be a nice convenient addition.

On Saturday, 20 April 2013 16:31:59 UTC+2, Michael Hsieh wrote:
>
>     I don't know why you are so angry. And I don't see any "hurt" you say
> are true.
>     I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more
> novice friendly.
>     Contextual keywords do have their power.
>     I'm wasting the precious time of the committee? I hope you know what
> you say.
>     "*even more* flavors of entry point"?  It take weeks for the novice
> to understand the main function. For experienced programmer,
> ten flavors of entry point won't waste them one minute. When you starts to
> lean, you don't need to care anything about the old entry. when you starts
> to work, it's just another deprecated API.
>     Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be.
> You know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't
> want touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?
>
> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:
>>
>> Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords
>> sucks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody
>> will be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper
>> in Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are
>> now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone
>> because vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example,
>> Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather
>> than needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there
>> is no *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this
>> goes through compared to in the existing system.
>>
>> There is nothing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses
>> implementation-defined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage
>> implementations from offering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can
>> do about this.
>>
>

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_28_30344940.1366470806711
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

If somebody needs weeks to understand the main function, then he should con=
sider another hobby/career. "Where do I put my code?" "Put it in `int main(=
)`, it's a special entry function." "Ok, I get it." [ few minutes, he wants=
 command line arguments ] "Hey, but how do I get program arguments?" "Here,=
 do it this way: it gives you argument count and an array of arguments." "O=
h, that's sweet. Thanks." - that's the whole deal for anybody I'd like to e=
ver be considered when creating professional language standards.<div><br></=
div><div>Java's entry point is NOT easier than C++'s. Compare `public stati=
c void main` with `int main`, and compare the fact you need to put it in a =
class with a free function. Also, if someone wants something "easy", he sha=
ll not touch C++ in any way and we shouldn't even consider their existence =
when working on the standard.</div><div><br></div><div>One thing I wish he =
had for the entry point was another standard signature - namely, vector of =
strings. I do know that it is trivial to construct a vector out of argc and=
 argv, but that would be a nice convenient addition.<br><br>On Saturday, 20=
 April 2013 16:31:59 UTC+2, Michael Hsieh  wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail=
_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;p=
adding-left: 1ex;"><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; I =
don't know why you are so angry. And I don't see any "hurt" you say are tru=
e.&nbsp;</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D=
"font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp; I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm=
 talk about make C++ more novice friendly.</span></font></div><div><font fa=
ce=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp; C</=
span><span style=3D"font-size:13px">ontextual keywords do have their power.=
</span></font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"=
font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp; I'm wasting the p</span>recious time of the<s=
pan style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp;committee? I hope you know what you say.=
</span></font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"=
font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp; "*even more*&nbsp;</span>flavors<span style=
=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp;of entry point"? &nbsp;It take weeks for the novi=
ce to understand the main function. For e</span>xperienced programmer, ten&=
nbsp;flavors&nbsp;of entry point won't waste them one minute. When you star=
ts to lean, you don't need to care anything about the old entry. when you s=
tarts to work, it's just another deprecated API.</font></div><div><font fac=
e=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; Again I don't care about legacy cod=
e. If it's not crack, let it be. You know what my friend said when I advice=
 them to learn C++. "No, I don't want touch something that even harder than=
 Java." You want C++ die with you?</font></div><br>On Saturday, April 20, 2=
013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"=
>Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords s=
ucks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody will=
 be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper in Co=
mmittee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are now *ev=
en more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone becaus=
e vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example, Windo=
ws already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather than=
 needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there is n=
o *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this goes =
through compared to in the existing system.<div><br></div><div>There is not=
hing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses implementation-d=
efined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage implementations from o=
ffering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can do about this.</div></=
blockquote></blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_28_30344940.1366470806711--

.

------=_Part_604_21608687.1366473382019
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    Function and entry point are all easy to understand. Unless you put=20
them together (still easy to you of course, but hard to one who never=20
programmed before). "Why my code didn't run?" "It's not in main" "But i=20
don't want put it in main" "then you need to call it" "I don't want to call=
=20
it, I want it run, just like in main" ....
    Smart people will be scared before you get there shoes wet (Consider=20
there are plenty of choice to them today).
    Java is a complicate language. If one can master Java, he's=20
smart enough to learn C++. But there are few reason to convince these=20
scared people to come back.
It's true the entry point of Java is not easier than that of C++, but we=20
can make the entry point of C++ easier than that of Java. The keyword entry=
=20
can make C++ looks like a peace of cake.=20
    I think we should do it if there is a way that can make C++ more easier=
=20
and do no harm to run-time performance.=20

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:13:26 PM UTC+8, Micha=C5=82 Dominiak wrote:
>
> If somebody needs weeks to understand the main function, then he should=
=20
> consider another hobby/career. "Where do I put my code?" "Put it in `int=
=20
> main()`, it's a special entry function." "Ok, I get it." [ few minutes, h=
e=20
> wants command line arguments ] "Hey, but how do I get program arguments?"=
=20
> "Here, do it this way: it gives you argument count and an array of=20
> arguments." "Oh, that's sweet. Thanks." - that's the whole deal for anybo=
dy=20
> I'd like to ever be considered when creating professional language=20
> standards.
>
> Java's entry point is NOT easier than C++'s. Compare `public static void=
=20
> main` with `int main`, and compare the fact you need to put it in a class=
=20
> with a free function. Also, if someone wants something "easy", he shall n=
ot=20
> touch C++ in any way and we shouldn't even consider their existence when=
=20
> working on the standard.
>
> One thing I wish he had for the entry point was another standard signatur=
e=20
> - namely, vector of strings. I do know that it is trivial to construct a=
=20
> vector out of argc and argv, but that would be a nice convenient addition=
..
>
> On Saturday, 20 April 2013 16:31:59 UTC+2, Michael Hsieh wrote:
>>
>>     I don't know why you are so angry. And I don't see any "hurt" you sa=
y=20
>> are true.=20
>>     I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ mor=
e=20
>> novice friendly.
>>     Contextual keywords do have their power.
>>     I'm wasting the precious time of the committee? I hope you know what=
=20
>> you say.
>>     "*even more* flavors of entry point"?  It take weeks for the novice=
=20
>> to understand the main function. For experienced programmer,=20
>> ten flavors of entry point won't waste them one minute. When you starts =
to=20
>> lean, you don't need to care anything about the old entry. when you star=
ts=20
>> to work, it's just another deprecated API.
>>     Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be.=
=20
>> You know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don=
't=20
>> want touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with =
you?
>>
>> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:
>>>
>>> Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keyword=
s=20
>>> sucks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody=
=20
>>> will be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this pap=
er=20
>>> in Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there ar=
e=20
>>> now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save an=
yone=20
>>> because vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for exam=
ple,=20
>>> Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, ra=
ther=20
>>> than needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, th=
ere=20
>>> is no *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if th=
is=20
>>> goes through compared to in the existing system.
>>>
>>> There is nothing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses=
=20
>>> implementation-defined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage=20
>>> implementations from offering new ones. There is nothing the Committee =
can=20
>>> do about this.
>>>
>>

--=20

---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/?hl=3Den.



------=_Part_604_21608687.1366473382019
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; Function and entry point a=
re all easy to understand. Unless you put them together (still easy to you =
of course, but hard to one who never programmed before). "Why my code didn'=
t run?" "It's not in main" "But i don't want put it in main" "then you need=
 to call it" "I don't want to call it, I want it run, just like in main" ..=
...</font><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; Smart people=
 will be scared before you get there shoes wet (Consider there are plenty o=
f choice to them today).</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif=
">&nbsp; &nbsp; Java is a complicate language. If one can master Java, he's=
 smart&nbsp;enough&nbsp;to learn C++. But there are few reason to convince =
these scared people to come back.</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, s=
ans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size: 13px;">It's true the entry point of Ja=
va is not easier than that of C++, but we can make the entry point of C++ e=
asier than that of Java.&nbsp;</span><span style=3D"font-size: 13px;">The k=
eyword entry can make C++ looks like a peace of cake.&nbsp;</span></font></=
div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; I think we should=
 do it if there is a way that can make C++ more easier and do no harm to ru=
n-time performance.&nbsp;</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-seri=
f"><br></font>On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:13:26 PM UTC+8, Micha=C5=82 Do=
miniak wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-le=
ft: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">If somebody needs=
 weeks to understand the main function, then he should consider another hob=
by/career. "Where do I put my code?" "Put it in `int main()`, it's a specia=
l entry function." "Ok, I get it." [ few minutes, he wants command line arg=
uments ] "Hey, but how do I get program arguments?" "Here, do it this way: =
it gives you argument count and an array of arguments." "Oh, that's sweet. =
Thanks." - that's the whole deal for anybody I'd like to ever be considered=
 when creating professional language standards.<div><br></div><div>Java's e=
ntry point is NOT easier than C++'s. Compare `public static void main` with=
 `int main`, and compare the fact you need to put it in a class with a free=
 function. Also, if someone wants something "easy", he shall not touch C++ =
in any way and we shouldn't even consider their existence when working on t=
he standard.</div><div><br></div><div>One thing I wish he had for the entry=
 point was another standard signature - namely, vector of strings. I do kno=
w that it is trivial to construct a vector out of argc and argv, but that w=
ould be a nice convenient addition.<br><br>On Saturday, 20 April 2013 16:31=
:59 UTC+2, Michael Hsieh  wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"=
margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><di=
v><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; I don't know why you are=
 so angry. And I don't see any "hurt" you say are true.&nbsp;</font></div><=
div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp=
; &nbsp; I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ m=
ore novice friendly.</span></font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-se=
rif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp; C</span><span style=3D"fo=
nt-size:13px">ontextual keywords do have their power.</span></font></div><d=
iv><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp;=
 &nbsp; I'm wasting the p</span>recious time of the<span style=3D"font-size=
:13px">&nbsp;committee? I hope you know what you say.</span></font></div><d=
iv><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp;=
 &nbsp; "*even more*&nbsp;</span>flavors<span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbs=
p;of entry point"? &nbsp;It take weeks for the novice to understand the mai=
n function. For e</span>xperienced programmer, ten&nbsp;flavors&nbsp;of ent=
ry point won't waste them one minute. When you starts to lean, you don't ne=
ed to care anything about the old entry. when you starts to work, it's just=
 another deprecated API.</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif=
">&nbsp; &nbsp; Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, le=
t it be. You know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No,=
 I don't want touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die=
 with you?</font></div><br>On Saturday, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, De=
adMG wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:=
0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Firstly, everybody will =
be hurt because implementing contextual keywords sucks and and uses up valu=
able implementation time. Secondly, everybody will be hurt by the time take=
n to design, specify, and vote on this paper in Committee. Thirdly, the use=
rs will be hurt by the fact that there are now *even more* flavours of entr=
y point. And finally, you won't save anyone because vendors can already off=
er their entry points this way- for example, Windows already offers all the=
 WinMain parameters through functions, rather than needing to use the WinMa=
in. From an implementation perspective, there is no *more* reason to favour=
 an API style over a new entry point if this goes through compared to in th=
e existing system.<div><br></div><div>There is nothing the Standard can do =
to clean up legacy code that uses implementation-defined entry points. Nor =
can the Standard discourage implementations from offering new ones. There i=
s nothing the Committee can do about this.</div></blockquote></blockquote><=
/div></blockquote></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_604_21608687.1366473382019--

.

--001a11c2ab98437ff804dacce9c2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 20 April 2013 18:13, Micha=C5=82 Dominiak <griwes@griwes.info> wrote:

> If somebody needs weeks to understand the main function, then he should
> consider another hobby/career. "Where do I put my


Agreed. int main() {...} does not take weeks to understand for any
half-competent person. The argument
versions are harder, but this "proposal" doesn't do anything to help people
with that. Discussing such
a wishlist item is indeed a waste of time. There's absolutely no chance
that it wouldn't be summarily
declared Not-A-Defect.

--=20

---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/?hl=3Den.



--001a11c2ab98437ff804dacce9c2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail=
_quote">On 20 April 2013 18:13, Micha=C5=82 Dominiak <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;=
<a href=3D"mailto:griwes@griwes.info" target=3D"_blank">griwes@griwes.info<=
/a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">If somebody needs weeks to understand the ma=
in function, then he should consider another hobby/career. &quot;Where do I=
 put my </blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>Agreed. int main() {...} does not take weeks to underst=
and for any half-competent person. The argument<br>versions are harder, but=
 this &quot;proposal&quot; doesn&#39;t do anything to help people with that=
.. Discussing such<br>
</div><div>a wishlist item is indeed a waste of time. There&#39;s absolutel=
y no chance that it wouldn&#39;t be summarily<br></div><div>declared Not-A-=
Defect.<br></div></div><br></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--001a11c2ab98437ff804dacce9c2--

.

------=_Part_672_23004913.1366474670223
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

    People can understand the function main in one lesson. Only by take=20
plenty of lessons(this wound be weeks) can they truly understand the=20
difference between main and other function.=20
    I copy some of my former comment here:
    "Why my code didn't run?" "It's not in main" "But i don't want put it=
=20
in main" "then you need to call it" "I don't want to call it, I want it=20
run, just like in main" ....
    If we tear function and entry point apart, there will be much less=20
confuse for them.=20
    remember that main is not a reserved word too. If you don't like=20
contextual keyword, then entry don't need to be a keyword, just like main.=
=20
no one ever used the word "entry" in this way:
entry{
}
this means no one will be hurt.

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:58:48 PM UTC+8, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On 20 April 2013 18:13, Micha=C5=82 Dominiak <gri...@griwes.info <javascr=
ipt:>>wrote:
>
>> If somebody needs weeks to understand the main function, then he should=
=20
>> consider another hobby/career. "Where do I put my=20
>
>
> Agreed. int main() {...} does not take weeks to understand for any=20
> half-competent person. The argument
> versions are harder, but this "proposal" doesn't do anything to help=20
> people with that. Discussing such
> a wishlist item is indeed a waste of time. There's absolutely no chance=
=20
> that it wouldn't be summarily
> declared Not-A-Defect.
>
>

--=20

---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/?hl=3Den.



------=_Part_672_23004913.1366474670223
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; People can understand the =
function main in one&nbsp;lesson. Only by take plenty of lessons(this wound=
 be weeks) can they&nbsp;truly understand the difference between main and o=
ther function.&nbsp;</font><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &=
nbsp; I copy some of my former comment here:<br></font><div><span style=3D"=
font-family: verdana, sans-serif;">&nbsp; &nbsp; "Why my code didn't run?" =
"It's not in main" "But i don't want put it in main" "then you need to call=
 it" "I don't want to call it, I want it run, just like in main" ....</span=
><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><span style=3D"fo=
nt-family: verdana, sans-serif;">&nbsp; &nbsp; If we tear function and entr=
y point apart, there will be much less confuse for them.&nbsp;</span><span =
style=3D"font-family: verdana, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div><font fac=
e=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; remember that main is not a reserve=
d word too. If you don't like contextual keyword, then entry don't need to =
be a keyword, just like main. no one ever used the word "entry" in this way=
:</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><font color=3D"#0000f=
f">entry</font>{</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">}</fon=
t></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">this means no one will be h=
urt.</font><br><br>On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:58:48 PM UTC+8, Ville Vou=
tilainen wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-=
left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div dir=3D"ltr=
"><br><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 20 April 2013 18:13, Micha=
=C5=82 Dominiak <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_bl=
ank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"4EoizBlWzmkJ">gri...@griwes.info</a>&gt;</spa=
n> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">If somebody needs weeks to understand the ma=
in function, then he should consider another hobby/career. "Where do I put =
my </blockquote>
<div><br></div><div>Agreed. int main() {...} does not take weeks to underst=
and for any half-competent person. The argument<br>versions are harder, but=
 this "proposal" doesn't do anything to help people with that. Discussing s=
uch<br>
</div><div>a wishlist item is indeed a waste of time. There's absolutely no=
 chance that it wouldn't be summarily<br></div><div>declared Not-A-Defect.<=
br></div></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_672_23004913.1366474670223--

.

--20cf307cfe02699bd704dacd3f40
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 "Why my code didn't run?" "It's not in entry" "But i don't want put it in
entry" "then you need to call it" "I don't want to call it, I want it run,
just like in entry" ....


On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Michael Hsieh <
michael.liberty.hsieh@gmail.com> wrote:

>     People can understand the function main in one lesson. Only by take
> plenty of lessons(this wound be weeks) can they truly understand the
> difference between main and other function.
>     I copy some of my former comment here:
>     "Why my code didn't run?" "It's not in main" "But i don't want put it
> in main" "then you need to call it" "I don't want to call it, I want it
> run, just like in main" ....
>     If we tear function and entry point apart, there will be much less
> confuse for them.
>     remember that main is not a reserved word too. If you don't like
> contextual keyword, then entry don't need to be a keyword, just like main=
..
> no one ever used the word "entry" in this way:
> entry{
> }
> this means no one will be hurt.
>
> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:58:48 PM UTC+8, Ville Voutilainen wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20 April 2013 18:13, Micha=C5=82 Dominiak <gri...@griwes.info> wrote:
>>
>>> If somebody needs weeks to understand the main function, then he should
>>> consider another hobby/career. "Where do I put my
>>
>>
>> Agreed. int main() {...} does not take weeks to understand for any
>> half-competent person. The argument
>> versions are harder, but this "proposal" doesn't do anything to help
>> people with that. Discussing such
>> a wishlist item is indeed a waste of time. There's absolutely no chance
>> that it wouldn't be summarily
>> declared Not-A-Defect.
>>
>>  --
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
> To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
> Visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=3Den.
>
>
>

--=20

---=20
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "=
ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposa=
ls/?hl=3Den.



--20cf307cfe02699bd704dacd3f40
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"color:rgb(80,0,80);font-family:verdana,sans=
-serif;font-size:13px">=C2=A0&quot;Why my code didn&#39;t run?&quot; &quot;=
It&#39;s not in entry&quot; &quot;But i don&#39;t want put it in entry&quot=
; &quot;then you need to call it&quot; &quot;I don&#39;t want to call it, I=
 want it run, just like in entry&quot; ....</span><br>
</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat,=
 Apr 20, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Michael Hsieh <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"m=
ailto:michael.liberty.hsieh@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">michael.liberty.hs=
ieh@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">=C2=A0 =
=C2=A0 People can understand the function main in one=C2=A0lesson. Only by =
take plenty of lessons(this wound be weeks) can they=C2=A0truly understand =
the difference between main and other function.=C2=A0</font><div>
<font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">=C2=A0 =C2=A0 I copy some of my former c=
omment here:<br></font><div class=3D"im"><div><span style=3D"font-family:ve=
rdana,sans-serif">=C2=A0 =C2=A0 &quot;Why my code didn&#39;t run?&quot; &qu=
ot;It&#39;s not in main&quot; &quot;But i don&#39;t want put it in main&quo=
t; &quot;then you need to call it&quot; &quot;I don&#39;t want to call it, =
I want it run, just like in main&quot; ....</span><font face=3D"verdana, sa=
ns-serif"><br>
</font></div></div><div><span style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-serif">=C2=
=A0 =C2=A0 If we tear function and entry point apart, there will be much le=
ss confuse for them.=C2=A0</span><span style=3D"font-family:verdana,sans-se=
rif"><br></span></div>
<div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">=C2=A0 =C2=A0 remember that main is=
 not a reserved word too. If you don&#39;t like contextual keyword, then en=
try don&#39;t need to be a keyword, just like main. no one ever used the wo=
rd &quot;entry&quot; in this way:</font></div>
<div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><font color=3D"#0000ff">entry</font=
>{</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">}</font></div><div><=
font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">this means no one will be hurt.</font><br=
><br>
On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:58:48 PM UTC+8, Ville Voutilainen wrote:<div=
><div class=3D"h5"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;marg=
in-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"=
><br>
<div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 20 April 2013 18:13, Micha=C5=82=
 Dominiak <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a>gri...@griwes.info</a>&gt;</span> wrote:=
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">If somebody needs weeks to understand the ma=
in function, then he should consider another hobby/career. &quot;Where do I=
 put my </blockquote>

<div><br></div><div>Agreed. int main() {...} does not take weeks to underst=
and for any half-competent person. The argument<br>versions are harder, but=
 this &quot;proposal&quot; doesn&#39;t do anything to help people with that=
.. Discussing such<br>

</div><div>a wishlist item is indeed a waste of time. There&#39;s absolutel=
y no chance that it wouldn&#39;t be summarily<br></div><div>declared Not-A-=
Defect.<br></div></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div></div><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5=
">

<p></p>

-- <br>
=C2=A0<br>
--- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals%2Bunsubscribe@isocpp.org" target=3D=
"_blank">std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org</a>.<br>
To post to this group, send email to <a href=3D"mailto:std-proposals@isocpp=
..org" target=3D"_blank">std-proposals@isocpp.org</a>.<br>
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den" target=3D"_blank">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp=
..org/group/std-proposals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br>
=C2=A0<br>
=C2=A0<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--20cf307cfe02699bd704dacd3f40--

.

--047d7b6778a69bf99804dacdfcb7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 20 April 2013 17:22, Brent Friedman <fourthgeek@gmail.com> wrote:

>  "Why my code didn't run?" "It's not in entry" "But i don't want put it in
> entry" "then you need to call it" "I don't want to call it, I want it run,
> just like in entry" ....
>

+1 (I thought of the same thing, but you put it much more humorously :-))

Of course, the original poster is free to spend his time specing out his
proposal, implementing the reference implementation, writing up a paper and
presenting it at a meeting, where the committee will give it the time it
deserves, and that amount of time is in all likelihood slightly less than
the amount of time it took me to type up this email.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



--047d7b6778a69bf99804dacdfcb7
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 20 April 2013 17:22, Brent Friedman <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mai=
lto:fourthgeek@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">fourthgeek@gmail.com</a>&gt;</s=
pan> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"=
 style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"color:rgb(80,0,80);font-family:verdana,sans=
-serif;font-size:13px">=A0&quot;Why my code didn&#39;t run?&quot; &quot;It&=
#39;s not in entry&quot; &quot;But i don&#39;t want put it in entry&quot; &=
quot;then you need to call it&quot; &quot;I don&#39;t want to call it, I wa=
nt it run, just like in entry&quot; ....</span></div>

</blockquote><div><br></div><div>+1 (I thought of the same thing, but you p=
ut it much more humorously :-))</div><div><br></div><div>Of course, the ori=
ginal poster is free to spend his time specing out his proposal, implementi=
ng the reference implementation, writing up a paper and presenting it at a =
meeting, where the committee will give it the time it deserves, and that am=
ount of time is in all likelihood slightly less than the amount of time it =
took me to type up this email.</div>

</div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--047d7b6778a69bf99804dacdfcb7--

.

------=_Part_665_32422696.1366478806045
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh wrote:
>
> I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more
> novice friendly.
>

That is a laudable goal. And that goal should not be dismissed out of hand.
However:

1: They're *still* going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later,
since the *entire rest of the C++ world* will be using that. So you've
ultimately saved them nothing.

2: This is not the low-hanging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to learn
about C++" tree. Really, there are *dozens* of things harder to learn than
that `main` is where a program begins. Yes, `main` is weird in that it's a
function you can't call. But really, those are the only rules about `main`:
it's where the program starts/ends, and it's a function you can't call.
These are *not* difficult rules for a new user to learn.

Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be. You
know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't want
touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?

OK, let's dispense with the hyperbole; C++ is not going to die because of
`main`.

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:
>>
>> Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords
>> sucks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody
>> will be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper
>> in Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are
>> now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone
>> because vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example,
>> Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather
>> than needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there
>> is no *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this
>> goes through compared to in the existing system.
>>
>> There is nothing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses
>> implementation-defined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage
>> implementations from offering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can
>> do about this.
>>
>

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh wrote:
>
>     I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more
> novice friendly.
>

That is a laudable goal. And that goal should not be dismissed out of hand.
However:

1: They're still going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later, since
the entire rest of the C++ world will be using that. So you've ultimately
saved them nothing.

2: This is not the low-hanging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to learn
about C++" tree. Really, there are dozens of things harder to learn than
that `main` is where a program begins. Yes, `main` is weird in that it's a
function you can't call. But really, those are the only rules about `main`:
it's where the program starts/ends, and it's a function you can't call.
These are not difficult rules for a new user to learn.

    Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be. You
> know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't want
> touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?
>

OK, let's dispense with the hyperbole; C++ is not going to die because of
`main`. Nobody in the *entire history* of learning C or C++ saw the rules
for main and then rage quit the language.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_665_32422696.1366478806045
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh wrote:<blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left:=
 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"=
><span style=3D"font-size:13px">I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'=
m talk about make C++ more novice friendly.</span></font></div></blockquote=
><div><br>That is a laudable goal. And that goal should not be dismissed ou=
t of hand. However:<br><br>1: They're <i>still</i> going to have to learn a=
bout `main` sooner or later, since the <i>entire rest of the C++ world</i> =
will be using that. So you've ultimately saved them nothing.<br><br>2: This=
 is not the low-hanging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to learn about C++"=
 tree. Really, there are <i>dozens</i>
 of things harder to learn than that `main` is where a program begins.=20
Yes, `main` is weird in that it's a function you can't call. But really,
 those are the only rules about `main`: it's where the program=20
starts/ends, and it's a function you can't call. These are <i>not</i> diffi=
cult rules for a new user to learn.<br><br>Again
 I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be. You know=20
what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't want=20
touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?<br>=
<br>OK, let's dispense with the hyperbole; C++ is not going to die because =
of `main`.<br><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: =
0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">On Sat=
urday, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:<blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;=
padding-left:1ex">Firstly,
 everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords sucks=20
and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody will=20
be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper in=20
Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are=20
now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save=20
anyone because vendors can already offer their entry points this way-=20
for example, Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through=20
functions, rather than needing to use the WinMain. From an=20
implementation perspective, there is no *more* reason to favour an API=20
style over a new entry point if this goes through compared to in the=20
existing system.<div><br></div><div>There is nothing the Standard can do
 to clean up legacy code that uses implementation-defined entry points.=20
Nor can the Standard discourage implementations from offering new ones.=20
There is nothing the Committee can do about this.</div></blockquote></block=
quote><br><br>On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh w=
rote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8e=
x;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div><font face=3D"verdan=
a, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp; I'm not talk ab=
out clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more novice friendly.</sp=
an></font></div></blockquote><div><br>That is a laudable goal. And that goa=
l should not be dismissed out of hand. However:<br><br>1: They're still goi=
ng to have to learn about `main` sooner or later, since the entire rest of =
the C++ world will be using that. So you've ultimately saved them nothing.<=
br><br>2: This is not the low-hanging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to le=
arn about C++" tree. Really, there are dozens of things harder to learn tha=
n that `main` is where a program begins. Yes, `main` is weird in that it's =
a function you can't call. But really, those are the only rules about `main=
`: it's where the program starts/ends, and it's a function you can't call. =
These are not difficult rules for a new user to learn.<br><br></div><blockq=
uote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-lef=
t: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&n=
bsp; &nbsp; Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it=
 be. You know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I d=
on't want touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die wit=
h you?</font><br></blockquote><div><br>OK, let's dispense with the hyperbol=
e; C++ is not going to die because of `main`. Nobody in the <i>entire histo=
ry</i> of learning C or C++ saw the rules for main and then rage quit the l=
anguage.</div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_665_32422696.1366478806045--

.

------=_Part_328_6020047.1366480274549
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 9:31:59 AM UTC-5, Michael Hsieh wrote:
>
>     I don't know why you are so angry.
>
>
>
Please don't try to gauge other people's emotion based on text.  Most
people are really bad at it, and it is extremely annoying to be told you
are angry when you are not. Thanks.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_328_6020047.1366480274549
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 9:31:59 AM UTC-5, Michael Hsieh wrote:<blockquo=
te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left:=
 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"=
>&nbsp; &nbsp; I don't know why you are so angry.<br></font></div><div><fon=
t face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp;=
 </span></font><br></div><br></blockquote><div>&nbsp;</div><div>Please don'=
t try to gauge other people's emotion based on text.&nbsp; Most people are =
really bad at it, and it is extremely annoying to be told you are angry whe=
n you are not. Thanks.<br></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_328_6020047.1366480274549--

.

------=_Part_867_17127568.1366507206538
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> 1: They're still going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later,
since the entire rest of the C++ world will be using that. So you've
ultimately saved them nothing.
    But they don't need to know anything about main in the first
few mouth of leaning C++. When they get experienced, understand "main"
won't take them one minute. It's hard in the beginning.

> C++ is not going to die because of `main`
    Of course C++ won't die because of "main".  It's going to die because
the whole world believe it's very difficult. And almost the whole Java
community believe that the performance difference between C++ and Java are
little. People think C++ not worth it.

On Sunday, April 21, 2013 1:26:46 AM UTC+8, Nicol Bolas wrote:
>
> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh wrote:
>>
>> I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more
>> novice friendly.
>>
>
> That is a laudable goal. And that goal should not be dismissed out of
> hand. However:
>
> 1: They're *still* going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later,
> since the *entire rest of the C++ world* will be using that. So you've
> ultimately saved them nothing.
>
> 2: This is not the low-hanging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to learn
> about C++" tree. Really, there are *dozens* of things harder to learn
> than that `main` is where a program begins. Yes, `main` is weird in that
> it's a function you can't call. But really, those are the only rules about
> `main`: it's where the program starts/ends, and it's a function you can't
> call. These are *not* difficult rules for a new user to learn.
>
> Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be. You
> know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't want
> touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?
>
> OK, let's dispense with the hyperbole; C++ is not going to die because of
> `main`.
>
> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:
>>>
>>> Firstly, everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords
>>> sucks and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody
>>> will be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper
>>> in Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are
>>> now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save anyone
>>> because vendors can already offer their entry points this way- for example,
>>> Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through functions, rather
>>> than needing to use the WinMain. From an implementation perspective, there
>>> is no *more* reason to favour an API style over a new entry point if this
>>> goes through compared to in the existing system.
>>>
>>> There is nothing the Standard can do to clean up legacy code that uses
>>> implementation-defined entry points. Nor can the Standard discourage
>>> implementations from offering new ones. There is nothing the Committee can
>>> do about this.
>>>
>>
>
> On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh wrote:
>>
>>     I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more
>> novice friendly.
>>
>
> That is a laudable goal. And that goal should not be dismissed out of
> hand. However:
>
> 1: They're still going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later,
> since the entire rest of the C++ world will be using that. So you've
> ultimately saved them nothing.
>
> 2: This is not the low-hanging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to learn
> about C++" tree. Really, there are dozens of things harder to learn than
> that `main` is where a program begins. Yes, `main` is weird in that it's a
> function you can't call. But really, those are the only rules about `main`:
> it's where the program starts/ends, and it's a function you can't call.
> These are not difficult rules for a new user to learn.
>
>     Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be.
>> You know what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't
>> want touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?
>>
>
> OK, let's dispense with the hyperbole; C++ is not going to die because of
> `main`. Nobody in the *entire history* of learning C or C++ saw the rules
> for main and then rage quit the language.
>

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_867_17127568.1366507206538
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> 1: They're still going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later, =
since the entire rest of the C++ world will be using that. So you've ultima=
tely saved them nothing.<div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbs=
p; But they don't need to know anything about main in the first few&nbsp;mo=
uth&nbsp;of leaning C++. When they get experienced, understand "main" won't=
 take them one minute. It's hard in the beginning.</font></div><div><font f=
ace=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div>&gt; C++ is not going to =
die because of `main`</div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &=
nbsp; Of course&nbsp;</font><span style=3D"font-family: verdana, sans-serif=
;">C++</span><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp;won't die&nbsp;becaus=
e&nbsp;of "main". &nbsp;It's going to die because the whole world believe i=
t's very difficult. And almost the whole Java community believe that the pe=
rformance difference between C++ and Java are little. People think C++ not =
worth it.</font><br></div><br>On Sunday, April 21, 2013 1:26:46 AM UTC+8, N=
icol Bolas wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margi=
n-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">On Saturday, =
April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh wrote:<blockquote class=3D"g=
mail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;=
padding-left:1ex"><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif"><span style=3D"fo=
nt-size:13px">I'm not talk about clean up legacy code. I'm talk about make =
C++ more novice friendly.</span></font></div></blockquote><div><br>That is =
a laudable goal. And that goal should not be dismissed out of hand. However=
:<br><br>1: They're <i>still</i> going to have to learn about `main` sooner=
 or later, since the <i>entire rest of the C++ world</i> will be using that=
.. So you've ultimately saved them nothing.<br><br>2: This is not the low-ha=
nging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to learn about C++" tree. Really, the=
re are <i>dozens</i>
 of things harder to learn than that `main` is where a program begins.=20
Yes, `main` is weird in that it's a function you can't call. But really,
 those are the only rules about `main`: it's where the program=20
starts/ends, and it's a function you can't call. These are <i>not</i> diffi=
cult rules for a new user to learn.<br><br>Again
 I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be. You know=20
what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't want=20
touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?<br>=
<br>OK, let's dispense with the hyperbole; C++ is not going to die because =
of `main`.<br><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0=
;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On Saturday=
, April 20, 2013 8:13:53 PM UTC+8, DeadMG wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_=
quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;paddi=
ng-left:1ex">Firstly,
 everybody will be hurt because implementing contextual keywords sucks=20
and and uses up valuable implementation time. Secondly, everybody will=20
be hurt by the time taken to design, specify, and vote on this paper in=20
Committee. Thirdly, the users will be hurt by the fact that there are=20
now *even more* flavours of entry point. And finally, you won't save=20
anyone because vendors can already offer their entry points this way-=20
for example, Windows already offers all the WinMain parameters through=20
functions, rather than needing to use the WinMain. From an=20
implementation perspective, there is no *more* reason to favour an API=20
style over a new entry point if this goes through compared to in the=20
existing system.<div><br></div><div>There is nothing the Standard can do
 to clean up legacy code that uses implementation-defined entry points.=20
Nor can the Standard discourage implementations from offering new ones.=20
There is nothing the Committee can do about this.</div></blockquote></block=
quote><br><br>On Saturday, April 20, 2013 7:31:59 AM UTC-7, Michael Hsieh w=
rote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;=
border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><font face=3D"verdana, sa=
ns-serif"><span style=3D"font-size:13px">&nbsp; &nbsp; I'm not talk about c=
lean up legacy code. I'm talk about make C++ more novice friendly.</span></=
font></div></blockquote><div><br>That is a laudable goal. And that goal sho=
uld not be dismissed out of hand. However:<br><br>1: They're still going to=
 have to learn about `main` sooner or later, since the entire rest of the C=
++ world will be using that. So you've ultimately saved them nothing.<br><b=
r>2: This is not the low-hanging fruit on the "stuff that's hard to learn a=
bout C++" tree. Really, there are dozens of things harder to learn than tha=
t `main` is where a program begins. Yes, `main` is weird in that it's a fun=
ction you can't call. But really, those are the only rules about `main`: it=
's where the program starts/ends, and it's a function you can't call. These=
 are not difficult rules for a new user to learn.<br><br></div><blockquote =
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0;margin-left:0.8ex;border-left:1px #=
ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp=
; Again I don't care about legacy code. If it's not crack, let it be. You k=
now what my friend said when I advice them to learn C++. "No, I don't want =
touch something that even harder than Java." You want C++ die with you?</fo=
nt><br></blockquote><div><br>OK, let's dispense with the hyperbole; C++ is =
not going to die because of `main`. Nobody in the <i>entire history</i> of =
learning C or C++ saw the rules for main and then rage quit the language.</=
div></blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_867_17127568.1366507206538--

.

--047d7b6778a61bdf8c04dad4fd28
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 21 April 2013 02:20, <michael.liberty.hsieh@gmail.com> wrote:

> > 1: They're still going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later,
> since the entire rest of the C++ world will be using that. So you've
> ultimately saved them nothing.
>     But they don't need to know anything about main in the first
> few mouth of leaning C++. When they get experienced, understand "main"
> won't take them one minute. It's hard in the beginning.
>

But apparently they must be born knowing that "entry" would work, even
though, as you claim, it is next to impossible for their brains to
comprehend that "int main" works.

I will let you in on a secret that will let you be a deity to these people:

(SPOILER ALERT)

#define entry int main

You're welcome.


> > C++ is not going to die because of `main`
>     Of course C++ won't die because of "main".  It's going to die because
> the whole world believe it's very difficult. And almost the whole Java
> community believe that the performance difference between C++ and Java are
> little. People think C++ not worth it.
>

You speak for almost the entire Java community?  Wow.  You are impressive.
 Most impressive.
--
 Nevin ":-)" Liber  <mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com>  (847) 691-1404

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



--047d7b6778a61bdf8c04dad4fd28
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 21 April 2013 02:20,  <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:michael.li=
berty.hsieh@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">michael.liberty.hsieh@gmail.com</a=
>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left=
:1ex">

<div class=3D"im">&gt; 1: They&#39;re still going to have to learn about `m=
ain` sooner or later, since the entire rest of the C++ world will be using =
that. So you&#39;ve ultimately saved them nothing.</div><div><font face=3D"=
verdana, sans-serif">=A0 =A0 But they don&#39;t need to know anything about=
 main in the first few=A0mouth=A0of leaning C++. When they get experienced,=
 understand &quot;main&quot; won&#39;t take them one minute. It&#39;s hard =
in the beginning.</font></div>

</blockquote><div><br></div><div>But apparently they must be born knowing t=
hat &quot;entry&quot; would work, even though, as you claim, it is next to =
impossible for their brains to comprehend that &quot;int main&quot; works.<=
/div>

<div><br></div><div>I will let you in on a secret that will let you be a de=
ity to these people:</div><div><br></div><div>(SPOILER ALERT)</div><div><br=
></div><div>#define entry int main</div><div><br></div><div>You&#39;re welc=
ome.</div>

<div>=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;=
border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im"><div>&gt; C+=
+ is not going to die because of `main`</div></div><div><font face=3D"verda=
na, sans-serif">=A0 =A0 Of course=A0</font><span style=3D"font-family:verda=
na,sans-serif">C++</span><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">=A0won&#39;t di=
e=A0because=A0of &quot;main&quot;. =A0It&#39;s going to die because the who=
le world believe it&#39;s very difficult. And almost the whole Java communi=
ty believe that the performance difference between C++ and Java are little.=
 People think C++ not worth it.</font></div>

</blockquote><div><br></div><div>You speak for almost the entire Java commu=
nity? =A0Wow. =A0You are impressive. =A0Most impressive.</div></div>-- <br>=
=A0Nevin &quot;:-)&quot; Liber=A0 &lt;mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:nevin@evilov=
erlord.com" target=3D"_blank">nevin@eviloverlord.com</a>&gt;=A0 (847) 691-1=
404

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--047d7b6778a61bdf8c04dad4fd28--

.

------=_Part_781_29297373.1366509119685
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

> #define entry int main
You named a macro "entry"? Are you kidding me? You just telling the world:
"Hey, Somebody come and break my code". They'll not fail you.

> You speak for almost the entire Java community?
OK, I have no statistical data. I should use the word "many". sorry.

On Sunday, April 21, 2013 9:36:20 AM UTC+8, Nevin ":-)" Liber wrote:
>
> On 21 April 2013 02:20, <michael.li...@gmail.com <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> > 1: They're still going to have to learn about `main` sooner or later,
>> since the entire rest of the C++ world will be using that. So you've
>> ultimately saved them nothing.
>>     But they don't need to know anything about main in the first
>> few mouth of leaning C++. When they get experienced, understand "main"
>> won't take them one minute. It's hard in the beginning.
>>
>
> But apparently they must be born knowing that "entry" would work, even
> though, as you claim, it is next to impossible for their brains to
> comprehend that "int main" works.
>
> I will let you in on a secret that will let you be a deity to these people:
>
> (SPOILER ALERT)
>
> #define entry int main
>
> You're welcome.
>
>
>> > C++ is not going to die because of `main`
>>     Of course C++ won't die because of "main".  It's going to die
>> because the whole world believe it's very difficult. And almost the whole
>> Java community believe that the performance difference between C++ and Java
>> are little. People think C++ not worth it.
>>
>
> You speak for almost the entire Java community?  Wow.  You are impressive.
>  Most impressive.
> --
>  Nevin ":-)" Liber  <mailto:ne...@eviloverlord.com <javascript:>>  (847)
> 691-1404

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_781_29297373.1366509119685
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&gt;&nbsp;</font><span style=3D"fon=
t-size: 13px;">#define entry int main</span></div><div><font face=3D"verdan=
a, sans-serif" style=3D"font-size: 13px;">You named a macro "entry"?&nbsp;A=
re you kidding me? You just telling the world: "Hey, Somebody come and brea=
k my code". They'll not fail you.</font></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, s=
ans-serif" style=3D"font-size: 13px;"><br></font></div><div><font face=3D"v=
erdana, sans-serif" style=3D"font-size: 13px;">&gt;&nbsp;</font><span style=
=3D"font-size: 13px;">You speak for almost the entire Java community?</span=
><span style=3D"font-size: 13px;">&nbsp;</span><br style=3D"font-size: 13px=
;"><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif" style=3D"font-size: 13px;">OK, I have=
 no statistical data. I should use the word "many". sorry.</font></div><div=
><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif" style=3D"font-size: 13px;"><br></font><=
/div>On Sunday, April 21, 2013 9:36:20 AM UTC+8, Nevin ":-)" Liber wrote:<b=
lockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;borde=
r-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;">On 21 April 2013 02:20,  <span d=
ir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"javascript:" target=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mai=
lto=3D"zSbclRT1qgQJ">michael.li...@gmail.<wbr>com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>=
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

<div>&gt; 1: They're still going to have to learn about `main` sooner or la=
ter, since the entire rest of the C++ world will be using that. So you've u=
ltimately saved them nothing.</div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">=
&nbsp; &nbsp; But they don't need to know anything about main in the first =
few&nbsp;mouth&nbsp;of leaning C++. When they get experienced, understand "=
main" won't take them one minute. It's hard in the beginning.</font></div>

</blockquote><div><br></div><div>But apparently they must be born knowing t=
hat "entry" would work, even though, as you claim, it is next to impossible=
 for their brains to comprehend that "int main" works.</div>

<div><br></div><div>I will let you in on a secret that will let you be a de=
ity to these people:</div><div><br></div><div>(SPOILER ALERT)</div><div><br=
></div><div>#define entry int main</div><div><br></div><div>You're welcome.=
</div>

<div>&nbsp;</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8=
ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div>&gt; C++ is not g=
oing to die because of `main`</div></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-s=
erif">&nbsp; &nbsp; Of course&nbsp;</font><span style=3D"font-family:verdan=
a,sans-serif">C++</span><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&nbsp;won't die&=
nbsp;because&nbsp;of "main". &nbsp;It's going to die because the whole worl=
d believe it's very difficult. And almost the whole Java community believe =
that the performance difference between C++ and Java are little. People thi=
nk C++ not worth it.</font></div>

</blockquote><div><br></div><div>You speak for almost the entire Java commu=
nity? &nbsp;Wow. &nbsp;You are impressive. &nbsp;Most impressive.</div></di=
v>-- <br>&nbsp;Nevin ":-)" Liber&nbsp; &lt;mailto:<a href=3D"javascript:" t=
arget=3D"_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto=3D"zSbclRT1qgQJ">ne...@eviloverlord.=
com</a><wbr>&gt;&nbsp; (847) 691-1404
</blockquote>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_781_29297373.1366509119685--

.

--20cf30684a7127a85204dad5a35b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 21 April 2013 02:51, <michael.liberty.hsieh@gmail.com> wrote:

> > #define entry int main
> You named a macro "entry"? Are you kidding me? You just telling the world:
> "Hey, Somebody come and break my code".
>

I'm not telling the world this; I'm just telling *you* this.  I tell
everyone else to use "int main()" (or one of the other forms) and they get
it.  I have no exposure to people who can't understand "int main()" but are
born with the innate ability to just believe that C++ uses "entry";
apparently, you do.

Please post a concrete example where the macro solution breaks but your
envisioned solution doesn't.  I don't see how they differ.
--
 Nevin ":-)" Liber  <mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com>  (847) 691-1404

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



--20cf30684a7127a85204dad5a35b
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 21 April 2013 02:51,  <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:michael.li=
berty.hsieh@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">michael.liberty.hsieh@gmail.com</a=
>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left=
:1ex">

<div><font face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&gt;=A0</font><span style=3D"font-s=
ize:13px">#define entry int main</span></div><div><font face=3D"verdana, sa=
ns-serif" style=3D"font-size:13px">You named a macro &quot;entry&quot;?=A0A=
re you kidding me? You just telling the world: &quot;Hey, Somebody come and=
 break my code&quot;. </font></div>

</blockquote><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m not telling the world this; I&#39;=
m just telling *you* this. =A0I tell everyone else to use &quot;int main()&=
quot; (or one of the other forms) and they get it. =A0I have no exposure to=
 people who can&#39;t understand &quot;int main()&quot; but are born with t=
he innate ability to just believe that C++ uses &quot;entry&quot;; apparent=
ly, you do.</div>

<div><br></div><div>Please post a concrete example where the macro solution=
 breaks but your envisioned solution doesn&#39;t. =A0I don&#39;t see how th=
ey differ.</div></div>-- <br>=A0Nevin &quot;:-)&quot; Liber=A0 &lt;mailto:<=
a href=3D"mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com" target=3D"_blank">nevin@eviloverlo=
rd.com</a>&gt;=A0 (847) 691-1404

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

--20cf30684a7127a85204dad5a35b--

.

------=_Part_893_396548.1366511656894
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 6:51:59 PM UTC-7, michael.li...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > You speak for almost the entire Java community?
> OK, I have no statistical data. I should use the word "many". sorry.
>

That's still speaking for a fair portion of the Java community. And you
didn't really explain how it is that people who think that C++ is hard but
Java is easy are going to be convinced in favor of C++ by turning `int
main()` into `entry`. Especially when Java developers have to remember
`public static void main`.

Again, this is not the low hanging fruit of stuff that's hard to learn in
C++. If your intent is to make C++ easier to learn, your energies would be
better spent on things that *actually* prevent people from getting into
C++, rather than minor nitpicks that have never stopped anyone from
learning the language.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-proposals/?hl=en.



------=_Part_893_396548.1366511656894
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Saturday, April 20, 2013 6:51:59 PM UTC-7, michael.li...@gmail.com wrote=
:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;bo=
rder-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-left: 1ex;"><font style=3D"font-size:13px=
" face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">&gt;&nbsp;</font><span style=3D"font-size:13=
px">You speak for almost the entire Java community?</span><span style=3D"fo=
nt-size:13px">&nbsp;</span><br style=3D"font-size:13px"><div><font style=3D=
"font-size:13px" face=3D"verdana, sans-serif">OK, I have no statistical dat=
a. I should use the word "many". sorry.</font></div></blockquote><div><br>T=
hat's still speaking for a fair portion of the Java community. And you didn=
't really explain how it is that people who think that C++ is hard but Java=
 is easy are going to be convinced in favor of C++ by turning `int main()` =
into `entry`. Especially when Java developers have to remember `public stat=
ic void main`.<br><br>Again, this is not the low hanging fruit of stuff tha=
t's hard to learn in C++. If your intent is to make C++ easier to learn, yo=
ur energies would be better spent on things that <i>actually</i> prevent pe=
ople from getting into C++, rather than minor nitpicks that have never stop=
ped anyone from learning the language.<br></div>

<p></p>

-- <br />
&nbsp;<br />
--- <br />
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &=
quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals&quot; group.<br />
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e=
mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.<br />
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.<br />
Visit this group at <a href=3D"http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/=
std-proposals/?hl=3Den">http://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/group/std-pro=
posals/?hl=3Den</a>.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
&nbsp;<br />

------=_Part_893_396548.1366511656894--

.