On 24/04/10 20:06, Joseph Wakeling wrote:
Hello all,
Occasionally in C++ I find it useful to build an array which contains
classes of multiple different types all using the same interface -- by
constructing an array of pointers to some common base class, e.g.
class BaseClass {
// blah, bla
Hello all,
Occasionally in C++ I find it useful to build an array which contains
classes of multiple different types all using the same interface -- by
constructing an array of pointers to some common base class, e.g.
class BaseClass {
// blah, blah ...
};
class A : BaseClass {
// ... bl
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 05:07:41 -0400, Dan wrote:
So there's my questions
Why D2 changed in this way the operators overloading?
To avoid repeating tons of boilerplate code.
For example, you can do this:
void opOpAssign(string op)(ref Vector3 other) if (op == "+=" || op == "-=")
{
mixin("x "
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 05:32:25 -0400, Joseph Wakeling
wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I did a little review of the code, I concur that the code is pretty
identical, and the D version does not really do any extra allocation. I
found one place where you were using pow(x, 2) to square somethi
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> I did a little review of the code, I concur that the code is pretty
> identical, and the D version does not really do any extra allocation. I
> found one place where you were using pow(x, 2) to square something in
> the D version but doing it with simple multiplicatio
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dan wrote:
> Hi All,
> So there's my questions
> Why D2 changed in this way the operators overloading?
> I saw the the compiler compiles both the functions, even considering this I
> assume it's not safe to use the old D1 way,
> right?
Because Walter
Hi All,
I just downloaded D2 after a friend of mine told me about it and I was playing
with it, just to get confident with the
language.
In order to do that I was converting a simple geometric Vector3 class I wrote
in c++.
this is the (relavant for this post) D code
class Vector3
{
flo
