On 4/15/15 4:51 PM, Messenger wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 April 2015 at 19:09:42 UTC, Márcio Martins wrote:
Hi!
I use Appender a lot, and find it ugly to write this all the time to
efficiently construct strings:
app.put("foo");
app.put(var);
app.put("bar");
Sidetracking a bit, but when I started using Appender I was surprised to
see that put didn't return a reference to the Appender itself. Had it
done so, you could have chained your put calls very nicely.
app.put("foo")
.put(var)
.put("bar")
.put(more)
.put("stuff");
You can naturally write a small wrapper function that does this for you,
but it still strikes me as odd. Sadly I imagine changing the return type
would make the function signature mangle differently, breaking ABI
compatibility.
with(app)
{
put(var);
put("bar");
put(more);
put("stuff");
}
-Steve
