On Friday, 13 June 2014 at 19:03:12 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
I am making the following comment to have others confirm, as
well as remind others about a potential problem.
On 06/13/2014 11:14 AM, Andre wrote:
> unittest
> {
> auto intList = new List!int(1,2,3);
[...]
> class List(T)
> {
>
I am making the following comment to have others confirm, as well as
remind others about a potential problem.
On 06/13/2014 11:14 AM, Andre wrote:
> unittest
> {
> auto intList = new List!int(1,2,3);
[...]
> class List(T)
> {
> private T[] items;
>
> this(T[] items...)
> {
On Friday, 13 June 2014 at 18:14:10 UTC, Andre wrote:
Hi,
I have a template class "List" which should provide generic
list functionality. In my use case, using a class instead a
struct
is more comfortable.
Following unittest fails, although the forward range
implements the save method.
unit
Am 13.06.2014 20:22, schrieb H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn:
[...]
Generally, it's a bad idea to conflate a container with a range over its
contents. In this sense, built-in arrays are a very bad example, because
they show precisely this sort of conflation. But they get away with it
because
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 08:14:11PM +0200, Andre via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a template class "List" which should provide generic list
> functionality. In my use case, using a class instead a struct
> is more comfortable.
>
> Following unittest fails, although the forward range
Hi,
I have a template class "List" which should provide generic list
functionality. In my use case, using a class instead a struct
is more comfortable.
Following unittest fails, although the forward range
implements the save method.
unittest
{
auto intList = new List!int(1,2,3);
