On Sunday, 25 June 2017 at 17:20:51 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 25.06.2017 17:46, Petar Kirov [ZombineDev] wrote:
On Sunday, 25 June 2017 at 12:10:02 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 25.06.2017 13:37, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
out(result){ assert(result > 0); } // exists
out result => assert(result > 0) // more of the same
out(result; result > 0) // better
out result => result > 0 // not much worse
out(result; result > 0, "worse enough")
Also, what Guillaume said.
Why do we need to name the result at all?
Any conflicts with using
`out(out > 0, "message")`
or
`out(return > 0, "message")`?
Or even
`out(someCond($), "message")`?
So using either `out` or `return` or `$` or whatever to always
refer to the return value of the function. Just something that's
already relevant and used instead of `__result`.
This could even be naturally extended to having an implicitly
declared 'result' variable for functions (which could help in
optimizations maybe? Something like always having NRVO possible)
called `out` or `return`.
R foo(Args...)(Args args) {
out(return > bar && ensured(return), "foo() fudged its
return");
// ...
return = blah;
// ...
return.quux(var);
static assert(is(typeof(return) == R)); // of course; this's
old syntax
}
