On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 05:14:18 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 04:35:11 UTC, Jordan Wilson
wrote:
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:18:29 UTC, zjh wrote:
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:12:25 UTC, FairEnough
wrote:
`module private and no class private`
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 04:35:11 UTC, Jordan Wilson wrote:
Does Go and Python qualify as serious languages?
Of course not!
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 04:35:11 UTC, Jordan Wilson wrote:
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:18:29 UTC, zjh wrote:
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:12:25 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
`module private and no class private` goes against the
`consistency, integrity, encapsulation, and
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:18:29 UTC, zjh wrote:
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:12:25 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
`module private and no class private` goes against the
`consistency, integrity, encapsulation, and redundancy` pursued
by D, just to maintain the uniqueness between `D
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 01:57:01 UTC, Elias (0xEAB) wrote:
On Friday, 26 January 2024 at 23:41:51 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
That can end up to be a lot of files needing to be managed,
simply to control the escape of state into a module.
In case you’re worried about the clarity in your
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:12:25 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
..
Any answer to this question has to take into account the other
code in the module.
Of course, I can answer this question.
The code below demonstrates how D made it possible for me to make
a mistake when I first used D (i.e.
On Saturday, 27 January 2024 at 02:12:25 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
`module private and no class private` goes against the
`consistency, integrity, encapsulation, and redundancy` pursued
by D, just to maintain the uniqueness between `D and C++`. This
is very `funny` and not what `serious
On Monday, 22 January 2024 at 22:59:17 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
...
C++ private isn't private, const isn't constant, and one can
throw from nothrow functions.
But that, vI assume you mean that in C++ you can return
pointers/references to private mutable class members, and
therefore
On Friday, 26 January 2024 at 23:41:51 UTC, FairEnough wrote:
That can end up to be a lot of files needing to be managed,
simply to control the escape of state into a module.
In case you’re worried about the clarity in your editor’s file
list (or in similar tools), try packagizing your
On Thursday, 25 January 2024 at 00:19:54 UTC, Jordan Wilson wrote:
...
That wasn't what was said. What was said was "causing US
problems". I.e. on the whole, the lack of class-level privacy
does not appear to be causing widespread problems, which
implies that it's simply lower on the list of
On Friday, 26 January 2024 at 22:21:22 UTC, Meta wrote:
This is the only valid reason for introducing class-private
that's ever been put forth in this forum. I saw someone else
post a similar argument around class invariants awhile back as
well and it completely changed my mind on the issue.
On Thursday, 25 January 2024 at 15:03:41 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
On Monday, 22 January 2024 at 23:28:40 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Of course, ultimately, different programmers have different
preferences, and none of us are going to be happy about
everything in any language.
It's not
On Thursday, 25 January 2024 at 08:58:29 UTC, Danilo wrote:
You can use `q{}`
```D
string wrap(string f) {
return "void wrap_"~f~"() { "~f~"(); }";
}
void fun() {}
mixin(wrap("fun"));
```
Not only `q{}` will make this even less readable—it won’t even
work.
13 matches
Mail list logo
