On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 20:12:29 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 07:40:40PM +, someone via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: [...]
@property int data() { return m_data; } // read property
[...]
string something() @property { return this.whatever; }
[...]
Now I am not su
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 20:12:29 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 07:40:40PM +, someone via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: [...]
@property int data() { return m_data; } // read property
[...]
string something() @property { return this.whatever; }
[...]
Now I am not su
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 07:40:40PM +, someone via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
[...]
> @property int data() { return m_data; } // read property
[...]
> string something() @property { return this.whatever; }
[...]
> Now I am not sure which is the correct way.
[...]
Both are correct. :-) It's
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 18:10:52 UTC, Alexandru Ermicioi
wrote:
That is because const/immutable/shared are being applied on the
object hence 'this' variable inside function body if function
is a member of a struct or class.
So this will make sense ONLY for an object's method right ?
On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 05:47:05PM +, someone via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
[...]
> ```d
> public string getAmountSI(
>in float lnumAmount
>) const {
[...]
> }
> ```
>
> I used to put all attributes BEFORE the function name which now I
> understand is completely wrong since they shoul
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 17:47:05 UTC, someone wrote:
...
That is because const/immutable/shared are being applied on the
object hence 'this' variable inside function body if function is
a member of a struct or class. It doesn't make sense to have a
const modifier on a simple function.
I do not understand the compiler error when I add the const
keyword in the following function which works (and compiles) as
expected without the const keyword:
```d
public string getAmountSI(
in float lnumAmount
) const {
/// (1) given amount
string lstrAmount;
if (lnumAmount
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 16:24:38 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
Side note: in case you want to work with money, you may
consider using a specific data type like
https://code.dlang.org/packages/money instead of float/double.
Yes, I've seen it, and in a previous-unrelated post I commented I
am p
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 03:15:46 UTC, someone wrote:
Is the following code block valid ?
```d
float price; /// initialized as float.nan by default ... right ?
if (price == float.nan) {
/// writeln("initialized");
} else {
/// writeln("uninitialized");
}
```
if so, the following
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 10:38:05 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
You've never given something away for free?
... more often than usual LoL
Now, seriously, something for free has not a price = 0, it has NO
price, that's what null is for; we use zero for the lack of null.
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 09:36:34 UTC, Dennis wrote:
A `string` is not a class but an array, an `immutable(char)[]`.
You're right. My fault.
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 04:17:19 UTC, someone wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 03:55:05 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev
wrote:
If you want to give any type a "null" value, you could use
[`std.typecons.Nullable`](https://dlang.org/library/std/typecons/nullable.html).
At LEAST for some thing
On Wednesday, 30 June 2021 at 03:52:51 UTC, someone wrote:
at least I can do nulls with strings since it a class :)
A `string` is not a class but an array, an `immutable(char)[]`.
For arrays, `null` is equal to an empty array `[]`.
```D
void main() {
string s0 = null;
string s1 = [];
13 matches
Mail list logo
