https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
timon.g...@gmx.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #5 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-02
22:40:18 EET ---
Regardless of whether the two issues describe different problems, the pull in
issue 11545 fixes compilation of the code in this issue as well.
--
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #6 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2014-03-02 12:48:10 PST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
Regardless of whether the two issues describe different problems, the pull in
issue 11545 fixes compilation of the code in this issue as well.
1.
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #9 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-02
22:53:58 EET ---
Yes. And function literals are now allowed. But not delegate literals.
--
Configure issuemail:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #7 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-02
22:51:56 EET ---
No. But I think that is a separate issue. Your original report and test code
only concerned functions, which did not require a context.
--
Configure
, the title of this issue is 'remove function literals cannot be class
members annoyance'.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
$ grep function literals cannot be *.c
func.c:error(function literals cannot be class members);
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #11 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-02
23:00:57 EET ---
The pull isn't merged yet.
--
Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #12 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2014-03-02 13:06:00 PST ---
(In reply to comment #11)
The pull isn't merged yet.
I am sorry I was not making myself very clear, but surely the right way to get
rid of the function literals cannot
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #13 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-03-02
23:12:36 EET ---
Sorry, there does appear to be a misunderstanding.
I am referring to the code in the issue description:
(In reply to comment #0)
class C{
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
timon.g...@gmx.ch changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC|
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
--- Comment #2 from Vladimir Panteleev thecybersha...@gmail.com 2014-02-03
16:08:25 EET ---
Sorry, that's not right. I forgot the parens.
enum x = { return 5; }(); // allowed
struct S
{
enum y = { return 5; }(); // forbidden
}
--
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7653
Kenji Hara k.hara...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
[snip..]
We need to keep this key strategic advantage. First off, the fact that this
code isn't accepted:
BinaryHeap!(uint[], function (a, b) {return a b;}) heap;
is a clear bug.
Worst case,
On 7/18/2011 6:21 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'm actually still confused at why _functions_ should be passed as
template parameters
The beauty of alias parameters snip
... the beauty?
Please excuse me my tone becomes a bit rant-y, but I was asking _why_,
and the reason is just...
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 03:03:26 -0400, Mehrdad wfunct...@hotmail.com wrote:
On 7/18/2011 6:21 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I'm actually still confused at why _functions_ should be passed as
template parameters
The beauty of alias parameters snip
... the beauty?
Please excuse me my tone
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:49:52 -0400, d coder dlang.co...@gmail.com wrote:
Greetings
Sure, this does not solve the original problem, if it was really an
issue.
@d coder: do you have an example where runtime changing of the
comparison
function
behavior would be required?
While I do, I
On 7/18/11 8:21 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 09:49:52 -0400, d coder dlang.co...@gmail.com wrote:
class Foo {
BinaryHeap!(uint[], function (a, b) {return a b;}) heap;
// ..
}
You get another Error: this for __funcliteral1 needs to be type Foo
not type
On 7/16/2011 2:01 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/16/11 10:50 AM, d coder wrote:
Sorry for bumping. Want to know if there is a solution to the situation
I face often.
I think this is a reasonable thing to want, but it's difficult to
implement technically. You want a comparitor with state
Mehrdad wrote:
On 7/16/2011 2:01 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/16/11 10:50 AM, d coder wrote:
Sorry for bumping. Want to know if there is a solution to the situation
I face often.
I think this is a reasonable thing to want, but it's difficult to
implement technically. You want a
Greetings
Sure, this does not solve the original problem, if it was really an issue.
@d coder: do you have an example where runtime changing of the comparison
function
behavior would be required?
While I do, I am sure there are alternative ways to program to avoid needing
those.
But I
Greetings
I have experienced that it becomes quite difficult to instantiate certain
template structs/classes as members of another class/struct, when
function/delegate need to be passed as a template parameter to the
instantiated templates. For example if I wish to instantiate a binary heap,
and
Sorry for bumping. Want to know if there is a solution to the situation I
face often.
On 7/16/11 10:50 AM, d coder wrote:
Sorry for bumping. Want to know if there is a solution to the situation
I face often.
I think this is a reasonable thing to want, but it's difficult to
implement technically. You want a comparitor with state (which is fine),
but at the same time the state
25 matches
Mail list logo
