Steven Schveighoffer schrieb:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 12:10:42 -0500, Steven Schveighoffer
<schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:57:40 -0500, Daniel Gibson
<metalcae...@gmail.com> wrote:
spir schrieb:
Still, an other case when "new" annoys me is method chaining,
because it makes syntax heavier and less readable:
c = (new C(p)).do(x);
versus:
c = C(p).do(x);
Or, maybe, the parser could be clever enough to correctly decode:
c = new C(p).do(x);
Is this really a common case?
Constructing an object, just to call *one* method on it and then
throw it away?
If the do method returns this, you aren't throwing it away.
Ok, this is a case I didn't think of, you're right :-)
A realistic example (from dcollections):
auto ll = (new LinkedList(someOtherCollection)).sort();
http://www.dsource.org/projects/dcollections/browser/branches/d2/dcollections/LinkList.d#L1054
That being said, I'm really ambivalent on whether this needs to be
included. It's not that terrible that you have to parenthesize properly.
Also, I'm not sure if this is a common case.. although I had similar situations
as well (it was more like (new Cursor(somecollection)).where(...).select(..)
with where() and select() returning a Cursor that wrapped/used the preceding
cursor.. and also it was Java).
But I don't know if this is useful for other kinds of code that don't deal with
collections or similar stuff.
-Steve
Cheers,
- Daniel
