I know I can mark an argument ref to require lvalues, so I'm
wondering whether there is an equivalent for rvalues; that is, is
there a way to specify that an argument to a function MUST be an
rvalue?
For example, in C++ I can do this:
[code]
void foo(int && x) {...}
foo(5); // Works fine
int
On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 17:42:19 UTC, anonymous wrote:
On 31.01.2016 18:21, Matt Elkins wrote:
I know I can mark an argument ref to require lvalues, so I'm
wondering
whether there is an equivalent for rvalues; that is, is there
a way to
specify that an argument to a function MUST be an
Errr, ignore the makeFoo() line. Left that in by accident, has no
bearing on the issue.
On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 18:02:19 UTC, Matt Elkins wrote:
Here is the one I am using right now:
Actually, here is the whole module in case you are interested in
the unittests/usage:
[code]
import std.algorithm;
import std.traits;
struct ResourceHandle(T, alias Deleter, T Default =
On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 17:21:54 UTC, Matt Elkins wrote:
I know I can mark an argument ref to require lvalues, so I'm
wondering whether there is an equivalent for rvalues; that is,
is there a way to specify that an argument to a function MUST
be an rvalue?
For example, in C++ I can do
On 31.01.2016 18:21, Matt Elkins wrote:
I know I can mark an argument ref to require lvalues, so I'm wondering
whether there is an equivalent for rvalues; that is, is there a way to
specify that an argument to a function MUST be an rvalue?
For example, in C++ I can do this:
[code]
void foo(int
On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 17:42:19 UTC, anonymous wrote:
I don't know if this works in all cases, but it passes that
simple test:
@disable void foo(ref int x);
void foo(int x) {}
void main()
{
foo(5); /* works */
int y = 5;
foo(y); /* error */
}
My fault, I should
On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 17:55:53 UTC, Matt Elkins wrote:
Errr, ignore the makeFoo() line. Left that in by accident, has
no bearing on the issue.
I have found an interesting SO answer
http://stackoverflow.com/a/35114945/944430
This would explain everything that we would need. I am just
On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 17:48:53 UTC, maik klein wrote:
The problem is that x will be copied afaik which is not what
you want if you want to deal with ownership.
I think that can be solved by wrapping the resource in a struct
that deals with passing the ownership. Here is the one I am
On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 17:55:53 UTC, Matt Elkins wrote:
Errr, ignore the makeFoo() line. Left that in by accident, has
no bearing on the issue.
Ok, I think I understand why this doesn't work, at least. The Foo
passed into bar() is, of course, an lvalue itself.
So I can achieve this
On Sunday, January 31, 2016 17:48:53 maik klein via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Sunday, 31 January 2016 at 17:42:19 UTC, anonymous wrote:
> > On 31.01.2016 18:21, Matt Elkins wrote:
> > I don't know if this works in all cases, but it passes that
> > simple test:
> >
> >
> > @disable void
11 matches
Mail list logo
