On 11/29/11 11:39 AM, deadalnix wrote:
Le 29/11/2011 19:52, Andrei Alexandrescu a écrit :
On 11/29/11 10:50 AM, deadalnix wrote:
2/ Use that stract/class as a value type. You can do POD, but also
define constructor and destructor, copy constructor and overload
assignement. Anyway, you'll never be able to use proper polymorphism
here, because it would require virtual destructor at least. This is IMO,
what D's struct should achieve.
Yes.
The 2/ case is overly used in almost any C++ program. And D struct
should be able to match them. It wouldn't require much to make it
working :
- Default constructor.
No.
No, as "No it will never be done for reason xxx" or as in "No you are
wrong and it not necessary, here the way to do : xxx".
In both cases, the xxx is the most interesting part :'(
Neither :o). The default initializer that doesn't do any real "work",
does not throw, and puts the object in a state without ex-situ ownership
has brought D too many benefits to ignore.
We should be able to define types that refuse default initialization (a
la non-null pointers), but if the default initializer exists, it's good
as it is.
Andrei
