On 9/29/11 9:25 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
"Andrei Alexandrescu"<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote in message
news:j623kg$rfi$1...@digitalmars.com...
The proposed change adds net negative value. It forces people to create an
object in order to call a simple function
Not really:
OptGetter.optGet(...);
Even that "OptGetter." can be eliminated (parhaps after the existing opget
is deprecated).
Why do you need it if all you want is to get rid of it?
And for cases that need non-default settings, setting values on a struct is
no harder than setting a few variables.
You accuse people of using unsubstantiated "good" and "better", but then you
dismiss and hand-wave-away half the stated benefits. Can we at least stop
with the meta-arguments? That kind of debate inevitably ends up becoming
hippocritical.
Not criticizing any hippopotamus here :o). I think I stated my argument
fairly and without appealing to either honor or guilt by association.
Andrei
