On Monday, 6 August 2012 at 22:28:40 UTC, RivenTheMage wrote:
On Monday, 6 August 2012 at 21:51:24 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
There is no "outer". A nested struct has the same access as a
nested static class, meaning no access to any outer members
unless they're static.
Is there somewhere I can read the rationale behind that
decision?
I'm sorta half guessing on my logic here:
If structs are value types that can be re-locatable (And
separate entities) then having them dependent on something that
you can't relocate means... what?
Let's assume you create the struct, then pass it back out as a
returned item (quite common); Later the class gets destructed.
What happens with/to the struct? Since static functions/members
are always accessible at compile time nothing changes. Perhaps
your struct should probably be a class instead?
