On Friday, 6 March 2020 at 14:14:04 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 6 March 2020 at 14:05:55 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
Adam's way doesn't work either, because the call doesn't use
the alias, but just instantiates opDispatch with the new name!'
oh yikes, how did I not notice that?!
so yeah just kinda screwed. I'd probably suggest at tis point
having the opDispatch be a trivial implementation that just
forwards to another named method.
struct A {
template opDispatch(string name) {
auto opDispatch(T, Args...)(Args args) {
return other_name!(name, T, Args)(args);
}
}
auto other_name(string name, T, Args...)(Args args) {
// real implementation
}
}
and then to test it externally you do
a.other_name!("whatever", Bitmap)(args, here);
This isn't the worst thing to use and since it's just for testing
it's fine.
I came up with a similar interface like a.other_name!("whatever",
Bitmap)(args, here); after discarding .opDispatch() and I called
the thing
.dispatch(T, string fn, ARGS...)(...).
But didn't like the string part and that's when I introduced the
alias fn because I figured maybe it's possible to do something
like:
factory.dispatch!(Bitmap.load)(handle, path);
and get the Bitmap part from that alias and hence save the
duplicate Bitmap type in factory.dispatch!(Bitmap,
Bitmap.load)(...);
Anyways thanks for your help.
