On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 17:42:37 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 06:46:02 +0000
bearophile via Digitalmars-d-learn
<digitalmars-d-learn@puremagic.com>
wrote:
accepting useless code confuses newbies
i think that i'm not really a newbie now ;-), but i'm still
used to
declare various private module functions and variables as
'static'.
yes, sometimes this confuses me (as to "do i need to make this
sta...
ah, scrap that, it's D!"), but sometimes this is handy. why?
i'm still
have to use C sometimes, and i'm writing 'static'
automatically. having
compiler to accept it for anything high-level saves me one
regexp
search-and-replace. ;-)
I don't think he meant you personally. Well, I hope not. I was
confused by it too and I don't consider myself a D newbie.
I get that it is convenient for you. I have done a lot of C
myself. However, convenience loses to misleading in my book.
Consider that in the future, for example, "static interface
Toto{}" means something different than "interface Toto{}". I am
not debating whether or not that would ever happen or what would
even be the meaning of a static interface (even though I have an
idea), the point is more like this: every compiler version will
accept both versions of said interface, but some of those
compiler will interpret it differently. Now that's a problem.
Philz
