[LLVMdev] next

[Howard Hinnant]

On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:43 PM, Dale Johannesen wrote:

> 
> On Nov 14, 2009, at 3:16 PMPST, Howard Hinnant wrote:
> 
>> In many places there is code that looks like:
>> 
>>    MBBI = next(MBBI);
>> 
>> In C++0X there is a std::next that is likely to be in scope when these
>> calls are made. And due to ADL the above call becomes ambiguous:
>> llvm::next or std::next?
>> 
>> I recommend:
>> 
>>    MBBI = llvm::next(MBBI);
>> 
>> -Howard
> 
> "next" is a popular name; if it breaks llvm, I'd expect this standards change to break a lot of existing code.  Do you really want to do that?

I'm happy to open an LWG issue for you on this subject.  Here are directions on submitting an issue:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/lwg-active.html#submit_issue

Please don't hesitate to ask me if these directions aren't clear (I'll likely update the directions from your feedback).  Here is a link to the latest C++0X draft that your issue will be directing the LWG to modify:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n3000.pdf

The inclusion of next() into C++0X wasn't my proposal, nor do I have the authority to pull it.  But I can open an issue if you provide it to me, and the LWG will then consider taking the action suggested by the issue.

-Howard