On 11/07/2013 10:05 PM, Philippe Sigaud wrote:
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Ross Hays wrote:
And let me say that I really do like that this works in D. I can't imagine
doing anything like this in C++ (which is what I used primarily in the
past).
The only reason I joke about it being useles
Chris Cain:
One tiny place of improvement for your code, however, is if you
changed it to `static immutable offset = ...;` because that
helps the compiler know to do that operation at compile time.
The idiomatic way to do that is to use "enum offset = ...;".
Bye,
bearophile
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 05:10:57 UTC, Ross Hays wrote:
Okay here is something I was hoping for some general
clarification on related to this and maybe you can help me sort
some things out.
The opDispatch method has a template parameter of string
fieldName. In C++, templates are actually
On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Ross Hays wrote:
> And let me say that I really do like that this works in D. I can't imagine
> doing anything like this in C++ (which is what I used primarily in the
> past).
>
> The only reason I joke about it being useless is it really only supports
> vectors of
Okay here is something I was hoping for some general
clarification on related to this and maybe you can help me sort
some things out.
The opDispatch method has a template parameter of string
fieldName. In C++, templates are actually compiled so each
different use of a template class is compil
And let me say that I really do like that this works in D. I
can't imagine doing anything like this in C++ (which is what I
used primarily in the past).
The only reason I joke about it being useless is it really only
supports vectors of length 2 or 3 (technically 1 as well but that
is not rea
Boom, that last few were the issues. I elected to just move the
return for the setter onto a separate line, mostly because the
idea of auto returning different types seem foreign to me... I
have used auto plenty in C++11, but never like that and it just
throws me off. But fixing those other mis
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 04:38:23 UTC, Ross Hays wrote:
Thank you
No problem. I'm glad we're making progress on it. And don't feel
bad about mistakes while learning. They happen. Embrace them
because they happen to all of us at first especially when we're
juggling learning new syntaxes
Sorry, I forgot to mention in that post that you have
"toOffset" in your template constraint, which means it will
also never match. You'll have to define it or replace it with
`fieldName[0] - 'x';`
Also, you might not want to do `fieldName[0 .. 1]` because
that's a slice (which is just anothe
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 04:28:31 UTC, Ross Hays wrote:
class Vector(int N, T) if (N <= 3) {
T[N] data;
this()
{
data[] = 0;
}
@property ref T opDispatch(string fieldName, Args ...)(Args
args)
if (Args.length < 2 && fieldName.length == 1 &&
toOffset(f
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 04:28:31 UTC, Ross Hays wrote:
Strange. I'm getting a different error, but I'm still running
2.063.2.
The error I get is
`Error: cannot resolve type for t.opDispatch!("x")`
What version are you running?
I just updated to 2.064.2
In any case, the reason apparentl
Strange. I'm getting a different error, but I'm still running
2.063.2.
The error I get is
`Error: cannot resolve type for t.opDispatch!("x")`
What version are you running?
I just updated to 2.064.2
In any case, the reason apparently is multifold:
1. Apparently the proper error message isn't s
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 04:06:22 UTC, Chris Cain wrote:
So fix 2 and 3 and it works for getting x.
Also, define `toOffset` in the template constraint.
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 03:42:12 UTC, Ross Hays wrote:
I am actually a little curious why my original approach did not
work at all. Using some of what you provided and some of what I
had I get the following:
import std.stdio;
import std.string;
class Vector(int N, T) if (N <= 3) {
T
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 03:35:34 UTC, Ross Hays wrote:
Awesome that seems to do what I was going for. I had tried a
similar approach with @property dispatch and the subtraction of
'x', but I had left out the static if and had the opDispatch
returning a ref of the entry in the array (so th
I am actually a little curious why my original approach did not
work at all. Using some of what you provided and some of what I
had I get the following:
import std.stdio;
import std.string;
class Vector(int N, T) if (N <= 3) {
T[N] data;
this()
{
data[] = 0;
}
@pr
Awesome that seems to do what I was going for. I had tried a
similar approach with @property dispatch and the subtraction of
'x', but I had left out the static if and had the opDispatch
returning a ref of the entry in the array (so there would just be
the one @property still) but that resulted
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 02:48:31 UTC, Chris Cain wrote:
Minor tweaks might be necessary, but that should get you
started.
Actually, I refactored it a little bit to make it better
(original code was just a bit too messy for my taste):
---
struct Vector(int N, T) if (N <= 3) {
private
On Friday, 8 November 2013 at 02:13:01 UTC, Ross Hays wrote:
My end goal is to be able to instantiate a vector with a syntax
like...
`Vector!(2, float) vec = new Vector!(2, float)();`
...
Any suggestions?
Greetings,
This works:
---
import std.stdio;
struct Vector(int N, T) if (N <= 3) {
I have been playing around with a vector implementation that I am
trying to write in D, and have been having problems getting
something to work (it probably isn't even possible).
My end goal is to be able to instantiate a vector with a syntax
like...
`Vector!(2, float) vec = new Vector!(2, float)
20 matches
Mail list logo
