On Monday, 16 June 2014 at 08:56:24 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Sunday, 15 June 2014 at 18:32:31 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP63
This is solution for a problem I am currently having with
implementing http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP54 (afair it was also
mentioned by Timon Gehr during old discussion of that DIP)
New proposed semantics ( to catch your attention and get to
read the link ;) ):
template Pack(T...)
{
alias expand = T;
alias opIndex(size_t index) = T[index];
alias opSlice(size_t lower, size_t upper) =
Pack!(T[lower..upper]);
alias opDollar = T.length;
}
// no ambiguity as Pack!(int, int) is not a valid type
// is(element == int)
alias element = Pack!(int, int)[1];
I guess there's no way around it, but it seems inconsistent
that the operators are defined as templated aliases instead of
functions as anywhere else. Could you add a paragraph to the
DIP which points this out and give a short justification?
+1
And why these operators only ?
struct StaticVariant
{
alias opAssign(T t) = (immutable T x = t; alias x this;)
}
struct Json
{
immutable (StaticVariant[string]);
alias opDispatch(string s, T t) = (data[s] ~= t);
alias opDispatch(string s) = data[s];
}
void main()
{
Json john;
john.size = 1.78;
john.name = "John";
float johnSize = john.size;
string johnName = john.name;
}
Ok I am a dreaming D beginner. In this case multiple alias this
would be better. Also, I don't understand why we can't append
immutable array thanks to CTFE too. D is awesome in lots of ways
but it's quite frustrating too because it frees your imagination.
Where do we set the limit in terms of meta-meta-stuff ?
