I just became aware of
http://dlang.org/phobos/std_exception.html#.ifThrown . It's neat,
but it seems non-obvious to me how lazy + UFCS should work in
general.
consider
void lazily(T)(lazy T expression)
{
expression();
}
It's clear when saying lazily(a.b().c()); that the whole of
"a.b()
On 03/09/2015 03:03 PM, Logan Capaldo wrote:
I just became aware of
http://dlang.org/phobos/std_exception.html#.ifThrown . It's neat, but it
seems non-obvious to me how lazy + UFCS should work in general.
consider
void lazily(T)(lazy T expression)
{
expression();
}
It's clear when saying
On Monday, 9 March 2015 at 22:15:43 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
You are right. I had the same observation at minute 11:27
below, where I warn against UFCS with assumeWontThrow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=oF8K4-bieaw#t=687
Ali
Sorry, which is right? I know ifThrown
On Tuesday, 10 March 2015 at 14:41:00 UTC, Logan Capaldo wrote:
On Monday, 9 March 2015 at 22:15:43 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
You are right. I had the same observation at minute 11:27
below, where I warn against UFCS with assumeWontThrow:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v
On Tuesday, 10 March 2015 at 17:42:37 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
You are right again. :) However, putting the lazy-taking
function "outside" the whole expression makes it visible right
away, making easy for me to realize that the execution order
may be different from common chains.
"lazy" aka "n
On 03/10/2015 08:00 AM, John Colvin wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 March 2015 at 14:41:00 UTC, Logan Capaldo wrote:
>> On Monday, 9 March 2015 at 22:15:43 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>>> You are right. I had the same observation at minute 11:27 below,
>>> where I warn against UFCS with assumeWontThrow:
>>>
