On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at 14:34:53 UTC, bauss wrote:
Would there be a reason why this wouldn't be a good
implementation?
If so what and how could it be improved?
Are there flaws in an implementation like this?
[... snip ...]
I am very interested in this as a potential alternative to the
binary assignment operators for properties DIP
(https://github.com/JinShil/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1xxx-mvf.md)
I would like to know if this can be improved to support the
following:
* binary assignment operators (e.g. +=)
* unary assignment operators (e.g. ++)
* @safe, @nogc, and -betterC compatible
* at least as good code generation as that proposed in the DIP
when optimizations are enabled.
D has the philosophy that the language should strive to provide
composable primitives, and delegate syntactic sugar to libraries.
I like that philosophy and I think it would prevent an expense
of limited resources if we could find a good library
implementation for this.
Mike
