On Tuesday, 12 January 2021 at 18:44:53 UTC, Jonathan Levi wrote:
On Tuesday, 12 January 2021 at 17:46:14 UTC, Q. Schroll wrote:
It's obvious why arrays work, it's the primary use case. I
have no idea why classes are allowed. That classes are
allowed, but structs are not, makes no sense to me.
I like the variadic feature for classes, but I wish it worked
for structs as well, given that structs are value types on the
stack anyway, the same assembly could have either signature
(assuming matching argument/struct ordering).
But why does this compile?
```
struct S {/*...*/}
void fun(S s...) {/*...*/}
```
If structs do not work as variadic parameters, why does `fun`
still compile?
Because D does allow you to specify things that have no effect.
People sometimes complain about this as nonsense, but it has its
merits in meta-programming:
void fun(T)(T t...) { }
Here, if T is a class or array type (including static arrays,
btw), the dots have an effect, otherwise not. It would be
unnecessary to require a split on the basis what T is.
