Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily recommended) will it
be possible to overload properties against non-properties? My use case is
that I'm thinking about API improvements for my dflplot lib and one thing that
I would really like is to give a fluent interface to everything to f
On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 09:16:47 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily recommended)
will it
be possible to overload properties against non-properties? My use case
is
that I'm thinking about API improvements for my dflplot lib and one
thing that
I would
On 15.07.2010 15:16, dsimcha wrote:
Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily recommended) will it
be possible to overload properties against non-properties? My use case is
that I'm thinking about API improvements for my dflplot lib and one thing that
I would really like is to give
== Quote from torhu (n...@spam.invalid)'s article
> In case the answer is no, that example of yours is the perfect
> opportunity to dust off the almost-forgotten with statement :)
> with (Histogram(someData, 10)) {
> barColor = getColor(255, 0, 0);
> histType = HistType.Probability;
>
On 15.07.2010 17:42, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from torhu (n...@spam.invalid)'s article
In case the answer is no, that example of yours is the perfect
opportunity to dust off the almost-forgotten with statement :)
with (Histogram(someData, 10)) {
barColor = getColor(255, 0, 0);
hi
Hello dsimcha,
Histogram(someData, 10)
.barColor(getColor(255, 0, 0))
.histType(HistType.Probability)
.toFigure.title("A Histogram")
.xLabel("Stuff").showAsMain();
With a little meta programming you might be able to make a type that generate
a fluent interface for any type. Using opDispatch y
On 16.07.2010 01:46, BCS wrote:
Hello dsimcha,
Histogram(someData, 10)
.barColor(getColor(255, 0, 0))
.histType(HistType.Probability)
.toFigure.title("A Histogram")
.xLabel("Stuff").showAsMain();
With a little meta programming you might be able to make a type that generate
a fluent inter
On 07/15/2010 09:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily recommended) will it
> be possible to overload properties against non-properties? My use case is
> that I'm thinking about API improvements for my dflplot lib and one thing that
> I would really like i
== Quote from Chad J (chadj...@__spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article
> On 07/15/2010 09:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> > Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily recommended) will it
> > be possible to overload properties against non-properties? My use case is
> > that I'm thinking about API
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:58:58 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Chad J (chadj...@__spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article
On 07/15/2010 09:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily recommended)
will it
> be possible to overload properties against non-propert
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:58:58 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Chad J (chadj...@__spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article
On 07/15/2010 09:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily
recommended) will it
> be possible to overload properti
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 02:38:20 -0400, Don wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:58:58 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Chad J (chadj...@__spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article
On 07/15/2010 09:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily
reco
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 02:38:20 -0400, Don wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:58:58 -0400, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Chad J (chadj...@__spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article
On 07/15/2010 09:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
> Once property syntax is fully enforced
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 10:19:51 +0200, Don wrote:
> Andrei tried to avoid mentioning language features which he hoped would
> change. That's why there's no mention of __traits, for example.
But there is: §7.3.2, p. 275.
-Lars
Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 10:19:51 +0200, Don wrote:
Andrei tried to avoid mentioning language features which he hoped would
change. That's why there's no mention of __traits, for example.
But there is: §7.3.2, p. 275.
-Lars
The enum names example was too appealing. D
Robert Jacques wrote:
Before reading TDPL I'd had agreed with you 100%. Now, I find that TDPL
is either ambiguous or anticipatory in a small number of cases. For
example, Functions-as-Methods get more exposure than @property, but no
limitations are mentioned nor are there any generalized exampl
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Chad J (chadj...@__spam.is.bad__gmail.com)'s article
On 07/15/2010 09:16 AM, dsimcha wrote:
Once property syntax is fully enforced (not necessarily recommended) will it
be possible to overload properties against non-properties? My use case is
that I'm thinking abou
Andrei Alexandrescu:
> Since recently, however, Walter became very adverse to introducing
> breaking changes of any kind. He understandably wants to promote
> stability of the language. The only question is whether stability refers
> to the compiler's status quo or TDPL.
There are some holes/pr
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 10:34:28 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Robert Jacques wrote:
Before reading TDPL I'd had agreed with you 100%. Now, I find that TDPL
is either ambiguous or anticipatory in a small number of cases. For
example, Functions-as-Methods get more exposure than @property,
On 07/17/2010 01:14 PM, Robert Jacques wrote:
I'm also hopeful for Functions-as-methods, although you may be borrowing
trouble with your example. It appears that templates are not included in
T.init's scope as the following compiles:
struct Bar {
void foo(T)() if (!is(bar.foo!int)) { writeln("re
On Saturday 17 July 2010 11:14:26 Robert Jacques wrote:
> As for @properties and Methods-as-properties, I know I dropped out of the
> properties debate when the removal of Methods-as-properties was taken out
> of the proposal. The more I use @property and see it used, the more I feel
> that it's so
On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:13:02 -0400, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Saturday 17 July 2010 11:14:26 Robert Jacques wrote:
As for @properties and Methods-as-properties, I know I dropped out of
the
properties debate when the removal of Methods-as-properties was taken
out
of the proposal. The more I
Dnia 15-07-2010 o 22:55:04 torhu napisał(a):
On 15.07.2010 17:42, dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from torhu (n...@spam.invalid)'s article
In case the answer is no, that example of yours is the perfect
opportunity to dust off the almost-forgotten with statement :)
with (Histogram(someData, 10)) {
Oops, guess I should have waited until after my nap with posting :)
You could nest the with statements, but then it's getting more verbose.
Didn't see that. Now it's my turn for a nap :)
24 matches
Mail list logo
