On 08/19/2012 04:44 AM, bearophile wrote:
> Most of your code is very similar to mine, but I can also see many
> little differences, so it seems you have written your translation from
> scratch.
Yes, I've decided to start from scratch. I did look at yours after
struggling for some time and I was surprised to see how much
similarities there were between yours and mine.
Especially the 'static assert(false)' trick: Both you and I have thought
about using. Those were helpful in solving the two linker errors (which
maybe what you have experinced too).
The calls inside main() were being resolved to the D-equivalent of this
struct template (I don't have the D-equivalent anymore):
template<typename T>
struct type_list_to_vector {
void operator()(std::vector<int> &output);
};
And of course because there was no definition, the linker was
complaining. I saw that only after implementing the above operator() as
an opCall() that contained only a single 'static assert(false)'.
Then, I saw my mistake: The Head template parameter had to be 'int' (not
type).
> In your code you have left the original C++11 naming conventions:
> struct step(Direction d, Left, Right) {
>
> But in D it's better to write:
> struct Step(Direction d, left, right) {
Absolutely. I've decided to make as little changes as needed.
> In type_list_to_vector you have solved the problems in a simple way and
> using a quite different way.
It is interesting and problematic that I could not replace the following
two lines:
type_list_to_vector!Tail tl2v;
tl2v(output);
With the following line (which is closer to the C++11-original) even
before or after defining a 'static opCall()':
type_list_to_vector!Tail()(output);
Error: function
deneme.type_list_to_vector!(repeat!(0)).type_list_to_vector.opCall (ref
int[] output) is not callable using argument types ()
I thought that it was a bug that the compiler does not construct an
object and call opCall() on it. (Note: I now suspect that the opCall()
being non-const could be the problem; but I still could not make it work.)
> Thank you,
> bearophile
Thanks for the challenge,
Ali
