On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:17:03 +0100, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 April 2013 at 11:02:24 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
True, but this is what I'd call a short term view of encapsulation and
code quality.
Thinking about encapsulation in the short term is important because it
forces you to p
On Wednesday, 17 April 2013 at 11:02:24 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
True, but this is what I'd call a short term view of
encapsulation and code quality.
Thinking about encapsulation in the short term is important
because it forces you to properly design things for the long
term. If you don't car
On Wed, 17 Apr 2013 12:02:25 +0100, Regan Heath
wrote:
So, ultimately encapsulation (one aspect of good design) should lead to
code which is better in every measurable way, including running faster.
It may not have been 100% clear what I was implying here. Because
encapsulation makes the
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 18:51:06 +0100, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 15:23:56 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
I would question always question "fully intended" on a case by case
basis:
http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/how-non-member-functions-improve-encapsu/184401197
I agree that grouping
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 21:14:16 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 04/16/2013 08:44 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
When that happens, would you expect a and b also become handles
to the new object? It could I guess, but it sounds impractical
in a system language. The runtime does not maintain a record of
On 04/16/2013 08:44 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
> On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 15:27:10 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>> On 04/16/2013 07:57 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
>> It would be bad design if a class variable decided to refer to another
>> object without the owner of that variable knowing about it.
>
>
> I d
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 15:23:56 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
I would question always question "fully intended" on a case by
case basis:
http://www.drdobbs.com/cpp/how-non-member-functions-improve-encapsu/184401197
I agree that grouping functions together that should be used
together, or on th
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 15:27:10 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 04/16/2013 07:57 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
It would be bad design if a class variable decided to refer to
another object without the owner of that variable knowing about
it.
I don't know, It seems like the caller of the function sh
On 04/16/2013 07:57 AM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
> seems like bad design to
> have a function that is fully intended to be a class function but not
> actually be able to declare it within the class block.
It would be bad design if a class variable decided to refer to another
object without the owner o
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:57:09 +0100, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 14:33:21 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
A member function cannot modify it's own 'this' pointer.
However, a free function can do it happily, which when combined with
UFCS gives you the same syntax and behaviour:
c
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 14:57:11 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 14:33:21 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
A member function cannot modify it's own 'this' pointer.
However, a free function can do it happily, which when
combined with UFCS gives you the same syntax and behaviour:
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 14:33:21 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
A member function cannot modify it's own 'this' pointer.
However, a free function can do it happily, which when combined
with UFCS gives you the same syntax and behaviour:
class A {
//..
}
void replace(ref A a)
{
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 14:33:21 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
A member function cannot modify it's own 'this' pointer.
However, a free function can do it happily, which when combined
with UFCS gives you the same syntax and behaviour:
class A {
//..
}
void replace(ref A a)
{
On Tuesday, 16 April 2013 at 05:37:48 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
I could not think of what to call this because I don't know if
it has a name to call it by.
Basicly what I was wondering is if their was a way in D to make
a class function pass the object being called on by reference.
might be eas
I could not think of what to call this because I don't know if it
has a name to call it by.
Basicly what I was wondering is if their was a way in D to make a
class function pass the object being called on by reference.
might be easier to show code, basically I want something like
this to be
15 matches
Mail list logo
