Re: interfaces and contracts - new pattern

2019-12-02 Thread Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Tuesday, 3 December 2019 at 02:57:13 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: On Monday, 2 December 2019 at 22:31:08 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Interesting, could be useful, but now you have to remember to add "in(false)". Yeah, it is kinda tempting to propose a language change, where an override

Re: interfaces and contracts - new pattern

2019-12-02 Thread Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Monday, 2 December 2019 at 22:31:08 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Interesting, could be useful, but now you have to remember to add "in(false)". Yeah, it is kinda tempting to propose a language change, where an override method does this by default if nothing else is specified. I think

Re: interfaces and contracts - new pattern

2019-12-02 Thread Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Monday, 2 December 2019 at 20:30:49 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: Wrote about it in more details here: http://dpldocs.info/this-week-in-d/Blog.Posted_2019_12_02.html i think this is a pretty cool little discovery, thanks too for the folks on irc for chatting it through. Interesting, could be

interfaces and contracts - new pattern

2019-12-02 Thread Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce
In short use `in(false)` when you `override` a function to inherit the contract, unless you explicitly want to expand the input - which you shouldn't do when implementing an interface! Wrote about it in more details here: http://dpldocs.info/this-week-in-d/Blog.Posted_2019_12_02.html i think

Re: LDC 1.19.0-beta2

2019-12-02 Thread kinke via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Sunday, 1 December 2019 at 19:11:53 UTC, Dennis wrote: I have Visual Studio installed. How do I know which import libraries are being used? Then you're most likely NOT using the MS toolchain, since it has to be explicitly enabled (see README.txt). - It can be verified by checking the DLL