'With' keyword in C++

Writing VB style using C++ is a shame to you and this violate C++ god programming techniguqes and pricinples.

You better familiar yourself with C++ rather than request a shortcut.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

Code:

---

with this->btnButton
{
  Text =
  ForeColor =
  BackColor =
}

---

---

The thing is, in a typical C++ program such data would be private.

You would not be thinking about the individual data items, but about the button as a whole. Instead of writing to individual data members, you would have functions which change the state of the button:

Code:

---

btnButton->SetText(someText, someForeColor, someBackColor);

---

Code:

---


I have not come across keyword "with" in C++ associated with structures and class.

Even if it is provided I will avoid using it.


struct MyStruct
{
        int        nAge;
        int        nGrade;
};

void Function()
{
        MyStruct obj;
        int        nAge;
        int        nTempGrade;

        /* will below code result in obj.nAge = nAge or nAge = obj.nAge = nAge */
        with obj
        { /* or begin */
                nTempGrade = nGrade;
                nAge = nAge;
        } /* or end */
       
}

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnW@Wessex

Except in a few isolated cases, the use of this-> is usually completely unnecessary.

---

A taste-related thing, depends on the programmer. Also helps resolving unlikely ambiguity for intellisense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by srelu

If you think "this->btnButton->ForeColor = ..." is too long, you never saw a complex C++ source code.

---

I have actually, but it doesn't help.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter_APIIT

You better familiar yourself with C++ rather than request a shortcut.

---

You know, it's man's privilege to develop new things through a perspective of what he already knows. Well, that's exactly what I'm trying to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaccheus

The thing is, in a typical C++ program such data would be private.

---

Have you ever worked with a Button class? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaccheus

The thing is, in a typical C++ program such data would be private.

---

It is probably private in VB as well. Those are properties. All this if I recall what I used to do 5 years ago. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

Have you ever worked with a Button class? :)

---

Yes, in fact I've helped to write one which is used in commercial software. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by exterminator

It is probably private in VB as well. Those are properties. All this if I recall what I used to do 5 years ago. :)

---

In that case the 'with' construct would not work anyway, because C++ does not have properties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

I feel uncomfortable when I need to write like

Code:

---

  this->btnButton->Text =
  this->btnButton->ForeColor =
  this->btnButton->BackColor =

---

instead of (wish it worked this way)

Code:

---

with this->btnButton
{
  Text =
  ForeColor =
  BackColor =
}

---

Isn't the last piece of code more clear and understandable?

---

How about this?

Code:

---

{
    Button &B = *this->btnButton;
    B.Text =
    B.ForeColor =
    B.BackColor =
}

---

Closest you're going to get, but this sort of thing can certainly clarify code in many situations.

I just remembered VB code designer generated code, which is 'friend withevents...'. So yes, they might be private and still be able to use directly. Actually, I don't know exactly if they are. But it doesn't depend on whether they are properties or not. And it certainly doesn't depend on whether you're using VB or C. Well, I doubt any of them uses a different Button class apart from what's defined in Windows.

Lindley: I already understood the possible solution, originally suggested by Paul, so there is not need to duplicate it.

Zaccheus: Well, I just asked, because I found it curious that you didn't refer to the button directly as it's the usual way for me. So I write like ButtonName.Text = "123", and not something like ButtonName.SetText("123", enumJustPlainText, enumNoDontDisplayMessageBoxes, ... other things) to add text to a button. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

Lindley: I already understood the possible solution, originally suggested by Paul, so there is not need to duplicate it.

---

His example used a pointer, I believe. I was merely demonstrating that references work just as well in these cases.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

Lindley: I already understood the possible solution, originally suggested by Paul, so there is not need to duplicate it.

---

There is a subtle difference in that Lindley is using a reference instead of a pointer,
which is probably better if you want to create an alias to a member.

See, everyone's always repeating each other....no big.

Sorry, didn't notice the difference. :)
Thanks for the hint.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

A taste-related thing, depends on the programmer.

---

We made removal of unnecessary this-> part of our coding standards. People weren't using it for any good reason apart from getting intellisense to list the class members and then forgetting to delete the this-> part afterwards.

Also I had the job of writing the standards! :D. Nobody else minded the rule.

I have to agree, If I had to read someones code with this-> all over the place and unnecessary alias, I would be annoyed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

I just remembered VB code designer generated code, which is 'friend withevents...'. So yes, they might be private and still be able to use directly. Actually, I don't know exactly if they are. But it doesn't depend on whether they are properties or not.

---

It matters a lot. You never want to be directly manipulating the data members in a non-trivial class. Properties are get and set functions with a nicer syntax, which means you are not directly manipulating the data members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

And it certainly doesn't depend on whether you're using VB or C. Well, I doubt any of them uses a different Button class apart from what's defined in Windows.

---

C++ does not have properties, so it would certainly depend on what you are using.
What's defined in Windows is the Windows API, which is very different from the VB Button example you gave.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neolisk

Zaccheus: Well, I just asked, because I found it curious that you didn't refer to the button directly as it's the usual way for me. So I write like ButtonName.Text = "123", and not something like ButtonName.SetText("123", enumJustPlainText, enumNoDontDisplayMessageBoxes, ... other things) to add text to a button. :)

---

Like I said above, C++ does not have properties.