Constructor Destructor syntax improvement

[lauler1]

Hi

I'd like to propose a modification for enhancing the syntax in Cppfront, aimed purely at syntactic sugar. In line with the objective to simplify the language 10x, it seems to me that the current syntax for constructors and destructors may not fully align with this goal, particularly for those new to programming or coming from different programming backgrounds. I mean no criticism by this; it's merely a point for consideration. I'm not sure if this topic has been broached before.

The use of out this, inout this, and move this within the context of overloading the operator= appears to me as potentially confusing and not entirely transparent regarding its purpose for many programmers. To enhance clarity, an alternative could be to adopt terms like construct this, assign this, and destruct this respectively.

Thank you for your work.

[zaucy]

Adding additional keywords for constructor/destructor complicates the language more. I would have to memorize what construct translates to. Does it work for assignment as well?

Using out this as a constructor/assignment is natural and consistent since I can write a regular member function with the same behaviour.

[lauler1]

I just wanted to give an initial idea, the exact syntax could be better elaborated.
Constructors and destructors are concepts widely recognized by programmers across numerous languages, in contrast to the more complex notions of operator overloading or move semantics, which can be challenging for newcomers to grasp. My aim is to address a potential reluctance that might arise with Cppfront.
Curious query: Who is more likely to lead the adoption of Cppfront, novice programmers or experienced C++ developers?
Introducing keywords for constructors and destructors (that reinforce the intention) as optional alias for out and move within class definitions could offer both syntaxes, making the language more accessible.

[zaucy]

complex notions of operator overloading or move semantics, which can be challenging for newcomers to grasp

operator= can be a gentle introduction to this concept. Function overloading is a feature of cpp that isn't going away. In my opinion, changing the rules for constructor/destructor to hide function overloading would hinder learning rather than help it.

Even in C++ today if you declare a copy constructor there is an implicit operator= that gets generated. This behaviour has to be taught or worse the developer is blissfully unaware. In cpp2 utilising the operator= directly is more clear and consistent. Especially since constructing (with parameters) always involves the = symbol.

[lauler1]

I understand