Property rewriting; I feel it's important. Is there still time?

[Ellery Newcomer]

On 03/10/2010 11:10 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 03/10/2010 11:05 AM, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
>> On 03/10/2010 10:48 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> On 03/10/2010 08:42 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> {auto t = foo.prop; auto t1 = t; ++t1; foo.prop = t1; return t;}()
>>>>
>>>> within an rvalue context, and into:
>>>>
>>>> {auto t = foo.prop; ++t; foo.prop = t; return t;}()
>>>>
>>>> within a void context.
>>>
>>> The latter should be:
>>>
>>> {auto t = foo.prop; ++t; foo.prop = t;}()
>>>
>>> because there's no need to return a value.
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>
>> no
>>
>> auto a = foo.prop++;
>>
>> ?
>
> Not sure I understand the question. The statement you mention would end
> up lowered to:
>
> auto a = {auto t = foo.prop; auto t1 = t; ++t1; foo.prop = t1; return
> t;}();
>
> which does what the user would expect.
>
> (Lowering is conceptual, e.g. inline code or an intrinsic named function
> could be used.)
>
>
> Andrei

oop. nevermind. missed the void context part.