Suggestion: shortcut for 'new X' #2

[Kristian]

On Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:35:13 +0300, Ivan Senji  
<ivan.senji_REMOVE_ at _THIS__gmail.com> wrote:

> Kristian wrote:
>>  Ok, I think my previous suggestion for an optional shortcut was a bit  
>> too strange... For example:
>>  Foo f = new Foo;
>> Bar b = new Bar(10);
>>  <->
>>  Foo f = new;
>> Bar b = new(10);
>>   Now there has been a proposal of the following (I use 'local' keyword  
>> here):
>>  Foo f1 = local Foo;  //stack/RAII
>> Foo f2 = new Foo;    //heap
>>  I like the syntax also.
>>   How about if you could *alternately* write:
>>  local Foo f1;
>> new Foo f2;
>>  This would take care of the redundant class name in the declarations.
>>  (I just hate redundance! ;) Writing class names twice is frustrating;  
>> there is a pattern of "X ... X".)
>>  Constructor parameters are put after variable names:
>>  local Bar b(10);
>> new Bar b(10, true);
>>   If this (or something similar) is not possible, a lot of people  
>> (including me) could end writing auto typed declarations. For example  
>> (auto here means auto type, not RAII):
>>  auto f = new Foo;
>> auto b = new Bar(10);
>
> And I still don't see what is so terribly awful about that?

Hehheh, maybe I'll get used to it over the time if I have to...

>
>>  That could be shortened to:
>>  f = new Foo;
>> b = new Bar(10);
>>  Which leads to my suggestion:
>>  new Foo f;
>> new Bar b(10);
>
> Hmm, that looks a little to strange to me. It looks more like an  
> expression than a declaration.

local Foo f;

looks more like a declaration?
Maybe 'new' shouldn't be used with this syntax. (Or use "new var Foo  
f;"... or not.)

I am trying to found out a syntax that has one type name and a variable  
name, and in that order.

int i;
local File f;

vs.

int i;
auto f = local File;