On Sunday, 23 February 2014 at 23:14:24 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
On Sunday, 23 February 2014 at 21:06:03 UTC, Frustrated wrote:
Why does your WindowsGui violate the iGui contract?
It doesn't. It simply that one can't specify dependencies in D
if (iGui is WindowsGui) then iButton is WindowsButton;
It's not very hard logic but people are not even trying.
I understand what you intend your code to do, but that is still
breaking the contract which you setup. iGui takes an iButton
because you defined it that way, to only handle specific types
of iButton is a breach of contract. The language lets you break
contracts, but it should not help you do so.
Nope. It has nothing to do with the contract. You are totally
missing the point.
It is all about reducing typing a bunch of extra shit. Don't know
why you can't see that.
In any case once I get the mixin in finish it will do what I want
and be good enough.
IF the damn language had the ability to specify dependencies then
it wouldn't be a problem. Just because you insist on using D's
current model as the only model you will always be right... I
hope that makes you happy. In the mean time I'll be moving on to
writing cleaner code...
