On 5/19/2011 1:23 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Matthew Ong Wrote:
Perhaps I am missing something here. How can class level definition be
part of the mixin?
Does mixin generate the same binary code as #define as inline code,which
meant that same binary is repeated everywhere that macro is used?
On 5/19/2011 9:18 PM, Matthew Ong wrote:
On 5/19/2011 1:23 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
Matthew Ong Wrote:
Perhaps I am missing something here. How can class level definition be
part of the mixin?
Does mixin generate the same binary code as #define as inline code,which
meant that same binary is
On Thu, 19 May 2011 09:43:14 -0400, Matthew Ong on...@yahoo.com wrote:
On 5/19/2011 2:32 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
Template mixins are not exactly like copy and paste code.
* You can mixin the same template, at the same location, twice, taking
different parameters
* Mixed in methods doesn't
On 5/19/2011 10:02 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Thu, 19 May 2011 09:43:14 -0400, Matthew Ong on...@yahoo.com wrote:
According to Jonathan,
In the case of template mixins, you're essentially copying and pasting
code. Yes. Liked what you said, with optimization at compiled time.
I am
Hi,
From what I can see mixin in D is used in place of #define in
C++(cool!!!). However, I do have a few question.
mixin with template does address some of this issue I supposed. That
does allow me to define up to level of content of a class but is not
class itself.
mixin template
On 5/18/2011 10:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
but you can do a string mixin to define the entire class. This is not
an easy thing to do, because you'd have to write the entire class as a
string of text.
Thanks for the attempt and sample code.
Seen that script import somewhere before.
On 2011-05-18 20:05, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On 5/18/2011 10:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
but you can do a string mixin to define the entire class. This is not
an easy thing to do, because you'd have to write the entire class as a
string of text.
Thanks for the attempt and sample code.
Matthew Ong Wrote:
Perhaps I am missing something here. How can class level definition be
part of the mixin?
Does mixin generate the same binary code as #define as inline code,which
meant that same binary is repeated everywhere that macro is used?
Or does it make a linked to the in a
On 5/18/2011 10:46 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
but you can do a string mixin to define the entire class. This is not
an easy thing to do, because you'd have to write the entire class as a
string of text.
Thanks for the attempt and sample code.
Seen that script import somewhere
