On 16 July 2010 11:12, Heywood Floyd soul...@gmail.com wrote:
Lars T. Kyllingstad Wrote:
(...)
When we introduce templates, this should still work:
struct MyArray(T){
array[3] T a;
}
// Let's try
T == array[11] int
array[3] T a;
array[3] (array[11] int) a;
array[3] array[11] a;
On 16 July 2010 20:11, Mafi m...@example.org wrote:
Am 16.07.2010 11:12, schrieb Heywood Floyd:
Lars T. Kyllingstad Wrote:
I do agree that, if possible, the language should match how most people
think. But in this case, it is impossible, because of templates. How
would the following
Hey all,
I'm having some trouble understanding the whole const and immutable of D2,
especially since it seems documentation is not consistent (Or I'm missing some
things). I write quite a lot of C++ code btw, so I'm familiar with that.
---
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/htomodule.html says: D
Thanks for all replies, that was very helpful. I have one more question about
inout. If I understand correctly, it is always coupled to the use of a parameter
and cannot be used to get rid of the double GetBar in the following C++ example:
class Foo
{
public:
const Bar GetBar() { return bar; }
Not sure if I'm double posting now. Sorry if I am, but I didn't see my own post
appear this time.
Anyway, thanks for your replies, that was very helpful. I had one more question
about inout. If I understand correctly it cannot be used to get rid of the
double
GetBar function in the following C++
== Quote from Steven Schveighoffer (schvei...@yahoo.com)'s article
I'm not positive, but I think the second const applies to the second
function, I think you meant:
const Bar GetBar() const { return mBar; }
Uh, yes, of course. Pff, I feel bad for making such an embarrasing mistake.
And yes,
