On Friday, 21 September 2012 at 15:04:14 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 15:57:47 -0400, Jonas Drewsen
<jdrew...@nospam.com> wrote:
In foreach statements the type can be inferred:
foreach (MyFooBar fooBar; fooBars) writeln(fooBar);
same as:
foreach (foobar; fooBars) writeln(fooBar);
This is nice and tidy.
Wouldn't it make sense to allow the same for function
templates as well:
auto min(L,R)(L a, R b)
{
return a < b;
}
same as:
auto min(a,b)
{
return a < b;
}
What am I missing (except some code that needs chaging because
only param type and not name has been specified in t?
Although I like it, I wonder if it works in D's context free
grammar. Timon probably would know best...
I came up with this code, which compiles today:
import std.stdio;
alias int x;
void foo(x) {}
This would not be a valid syntax in my proposal since x is not a
parameter name as it should be, but a type name.
void foo2(string x) {writeln(x);}
void main()
{
foo(1);
foo2("hello");
}
Under your proposal, if we shorten foo2 to foo2(x), what
happens? Does it become just like foo? Or does it turn into a
template? Or is it an error?
A mentioned in the proposal (albeit not very clear) it requires
non-templated function definitions to include both type and param
names. If only one name is provided in a definition is always a
param name. Unfortunately this is a breaking change for some code
and that does speak against the proposal.
Note that just because some syntax isn't valid doesn't mean it
should be utilized for a valid use. That can result in code
compiling and meaning something completely different than you
expect.
I agree.
