On Wednesday, 20 December 2023 at 02:56:24 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
Instead you are trying to reassign the `this` reference, which
is a local (and also forbidden). Think about it a second, your
`this + rhs` is going to allocate a *new* object. Then if the
assignment to the local `this`
auto opOpAssign(string op)(Value rhs)
{
this = this + rhs;
return this;
}
// Error: `this` is not an lvalue and cannot be modified
```
Assigning an object is like copying a pointer. You may think you
can try overloading the assignment, but it is
[forbidden](https:/
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:13:20 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
I am trying to overload `opOpAssign` for my class. The code
compiles, but it does not seem to be working.
```d
// binary operations have already been implemented for Value
// i need +=, -=, *=, /=
auto opOpAssign(string op)(Value rhs)
On Monday, 18 December 2023 at 04:49:53 UTC, novice2 wrote:
On Monday, 18 December 2023 at 03:39:16 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 07:05:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:13:20 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
[...]
check what `op` is. pretty sure it is "+
On Monday, 18 December 2023 at 03:39:16 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 07:05:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:13:20 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
[...]
check what `op` is. pretty sure it is "+" not "+=" so your
element isnt' saved anywhere. also a bit
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 07:05:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:13:20 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
[...]
check what `op` is. pretty sure it is "+" not "+=" so your
element isnt' saved anywhere. also a bit iffy there isn't a
member here to work on
Yes, op is '+'.
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:13:20 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
auto opOpAssign(string op)(in ElementType rhs)
{
mixin("return this" ~ op ~ "rhs;");
}
```
check what `op` is. pretty sure it is "+" not "+=" so your
element isnt' saved anywhere. also a bit iffy there isn't a
member here to work
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:15:02 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:13:20 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
I am trying to overload `opOpAssign` for my class. The code
[...]
I forgot to mention, it is relevant to
[`Value`](https://github.com/rillki/tiny-grad/blob/main/source/rk/
On Sunday, 17 December 2023 at 04:13:20 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
I am trying to overload `opOpAssign` for my class. The code
[...]
I forgot to mention, it is relevant to
[`Value`](https://github.com/rillki/tiny-grad/blob/main/source/rk/tgrad/core/value.d) class only.
I am trying to overload `opOpAssign` for my class. The code
compiles, but it does not seem to be working.
```d
// binary operations have already been implemented for Value
// i need +=, -=, *=, /=
auto opOpAssign(string op)(Value rhs)
{
mixin("return this" ~ op ~ "rhs;");
}
auto opOpAssign(
c.add(2);
c.writeln; // x + 2 +
// with constructor:
c = Calculate("x");
c.add(2);
c.writeln; // x + 2 +
}
```
There is a simple struct like the one above that is not related
to reality. There can be more than 2 function overloading in
it, but in our example there
On Thursday, 2 November 2023 at 11:17:42 UTC, Salih Dincer wrote:
On Wednesday, 1 November 2023 at 20:04:52 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
Yes. D constructors are not named but the current
implementation adds a name that is `__ctor`, so add
```d
alias add = __ctor;
```
to you struct.
Yeah, it wor
On Wednesday, 1 November 2023 at 20:04:52 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
Yes. D constructors are not named but the current
implementation adds a name that is `__ctor`, so add
```d
alias add = __ctor;
```
to you struct.
Yeah, it works! Thanks...:)
SDB@79
On Tuesday, 31 October 2023 at 20:09:44 UTC, Salih Dincer wrote:
[...]
is it possible to do something like `alias add = this;`?
```d
struct Calculate
{
int memory;
string result;
auto toString() => result;
// alias add = this;
import std.string : format;
this(stri
c = Calculate("x");
c.add(2);
c.writeln; // x + 2 +
}
```
There is a simple struct like the one above that is not related
to reality. There can be more than 2 function overloading in it,
but in our example there are only 2. Without implementing a
similar function again for each c
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 23:43:03 UTC, NonNull wrote:
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 18:24:22 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
[...]
Ah, makes sense to limit the possible low level error messages
with separate compilation because of the linker not knowing D
signatures. Thanks for the intuition.
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 18:24:22 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
it prolly just to keep newbs from making confusing mistakes and
getting weird behavior at startup. If there's two mains, which
one is the expected entry? Perhaps it could just be the one
that matches the permitted signature, and if
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 17:41:07 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 17:29:25 UTC, NonNull wrote:
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 16:31:45 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
You should not have multiple mains. Rename it and call it
Doesn't answer my questions. I wasn't asking for pra
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 16:09:54 UTC, NonNull wrote:
I am linking to a C project with some C already automatically
translated into D including the C main function `int main(int
argc, char** argv){/* ... */}` which I wanted to call from a D
main function in a new module.
did you put exte
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 17:29:25 UTC, NonNull wrote:
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 16:31:45 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
You should not have multiple mains. Rename it and call it
Doesn't answer my questions. I wasn't asking for practical,
moral or esthetic advice.
Try to phrase your questio
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 16:31:45 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
You should not have multiple mains. Rename it and call it
Doesn't answer my questions. I wasn't asking for practical, moral
or esthetic advice.
On Sunday, 30 October 2022 at 16:09:54 UTC, NonNull wrote:
I am linking to a C project with some C already automatically
translated into D including the C main function `int main(int
argc, char** argv){/* ... */}` which I wanted to call from a D
main function in a new module. But then I found t
I am linking to a C project with some C already automatically
translated into D including the C main function `int main(int
argc, char** argv){/* ... */}` which I wanted to call from a D
main function in a new module. But then I found that the former C
main in D will not compile! ldc2 complains
On Wednesday, 22 June 2022 at 12:42:48 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
On 6/22/22 2:05 AM, monkyyy wrote:
On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 13:20:51 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
And you can also use an inner struct to define overloaded
functions.
I believe templates make a better bandaid
```d
v
On 6/22/22 2:05 AM, monkyyy wrote:
On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 13:20:51 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
And you can also use an inner struct to define overloaded functions.
I believe templates make a better bandaid
```d
void main(){
template bar(){
void bar_(int){}
void
On Monday, 20 June 2022 at 13:20:51 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
And you can also use an inner struct to define overloaded
functions.
I believe templates make a better bandaid
```d
void main(){
template bar(){
void bar_(int){}
void bar_(float){}
On 6/17/22 8:09 AM, Chris Katko wrote:
I don't need this functionality, but I wanted to be sure.
Does function overloading not work with nested functions? I got a
compiler error (something like "function already defined") when I tried it.
Correct, it's not allowed.
Howev
On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 13:04:47 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 12:19:33 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 12:09:33 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
I don't need this functionality, but I wanted to be sure.
Does function overloading not work with nested functio
On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 12:19:33 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 12:09:33 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
I don't need this functionality, but I wanted to be sure.
Does function overloading not work with nested functions? I
got a compiler error (something like "functi
On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 12:09:33 UTC, Chris Katko wrote:
I don't need this functionality, but I wanted to be sure.
Does function overloading not work with nested functions? I got
a compiler error (something like "function already defined")
when I tried it.
According t
I don't need this functionality, but I wanted to be sure.
Does function overloading not work with nested functions? I got a
compiler error (something like "function already defined") when I
tried it.
On 1/19/22 3:47 AM, Enjoys Math wrote:
```
module expr;
import dots;
import operator;
import equation;
import var;
import var_expr;
import zz_const;
class Expr
{
public:
void opBinary(string op)(string s) const
{
static if (op == "+")
{
Expr right = null;
On Wednesday, 19 January 2022 at 08:47:27 UTC, Enjoys Math wrote:
```
module expr;
import dots;
import operator;
import equation;
import var;
import var_expr;
import zz_const;
class Expr
{
public:
void opBinary(string op)(string s) const
{
static if (op == "+")
{
Expr
On Wednesday, 19 January 2022 at 08:47:27 UTC, Enjoys Math wrote:
```
module expr;
import dots;
import operator;
import equation;
import var;
import var_expr;
import zz_const;
class Expr
{
public:
void opBinary(string op)(string s) const
{
static if (op == "+")
{
Expr
```
module expr;
import dots;
import operator;
import equation;
import var;
import var_expr;
import zz_const;
class Expr
{
public:
void opBinary(string op)(string s) const
{
static if (op == "+")
{
Expr right = null;
if (s == ".." || s == "..." || s == ""
On Monday, 8 February 2021 at 15:56:24 UTC, Michael Brown wrote:
Hi all,
Is it possible to operator overload on enums? I'd like to do a
opCmp()
Kind regards,
Mike
You can create custom struct type with opCmp() and create enum
with that type. Example: https://run.dlang.io/is/m7DN66
Hi all,
Is it possible to operator overload on enums? I'd like to do a
opCmp()
Kind regards,
Mike
On Monday, 8 February 2021 at 15:56:24 UTC, Michael Brown wrote:
Hi all,
Is it possible to operator overload on enums? I'd like to do a
opCmp()
Kind regards,
Mike
No, it isn't. Only structs and classes can have overloaded
operators.
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 18:51:04 UTC, Jack wrote:
alias Callback = void function(const C, int);
void main()
{
auto l = SList!Callback();
auto a = (C c, int d) { };
auto b = (C c, int d) { };
auto c = (const C c, int d) { };
l.insert(a);
l.insert(b);
l.insert(c);
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 18:51:04 UTC, Jack wrote:
Here's what I'm trying to make to work:
import std.container : SList;
class C
{
static immutable Foo = new C();
//
}
alias Callback = void function(const C, int);
void main()
{
auto l = SList!Callback();
auto a = (C c
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 18:37:58 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 18:12:17 UTC, Jack wrote:
thanks! now, how would I add const here?
import std.container : SList;
auto l = SList!Callabck();
doesn't work:
auto l = SList!(const(Callabck()));
auto l = SList!(const Callabc
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 18:12:17 UTC, Jack wrote:
thanks! now, how would I add const here?
import std.container : SList;
auto l = SList!Callabck();
doesn't work:
auto l = SList!(const(Callabck()));
auto l = SList!(const Callabck());
You said you want the callbacks to accept both mutabl
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 16:56:05 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 16:40:01 UTC, Jack wrote:
let's say a I have this:
void f(X foo) { }
but I'd like to make f() accept immutable X too so instead of
cast away everywhere in the code where immutable(X) is passed
to f() or
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 16:40:01 UTC, Jack wrote:
let's say a I have this:
void f(X foo) { }
but I'd like to make f() accept immutable X too so instead of
cast away everywhere in the code where immutable(X) is passed
to f() or make a overload for this, are there any way to accept
both
let's say a I have this:
void f(X foo) { }
but I'd like to make f() accept immutable X too so instead of
cast away everywhere in the code where immutable(X) is passed to
f() or make a overload for this, are there any way to accept both
in same function? those function are callback-like functi
On 1/10/21 7:27 PM, Paul wrote:
> On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 02:37:24 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>> >> T opCast(T)() const if (is(T : Vec!(size, S2), S2)) {
>
>> The is expression can be so complicated that I used a different
>> approach below.
>
>> if (isInstanceOfVec!T &&
>> T.init.
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 03:40:41 UTC, Paul wrote:
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 00:48:49 UTC, Steven
Schveighoffer wrote:
I would think though, that this should work:
T opCast(T : Vec!(vecsize, S), S)()
Oh wouw, this seems to work perfectly! Awesome thanks ^^
Any Idea why
T opCast(T,
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 00:48:49 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
I would think though, that this should work:
T opCast(T : Vec!(vecsize, S), S)()
Oh wouw, this seems to work perfectly! Awesome thanks ^^
Any Idea why
T opCast(T, S)() const if (is(T : Vec!(grootte, S))) {
yields the er
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 02:37:24 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>> T opCast(T)() const if (is(T : Vec!(size, S2), S2)) {
The is expression can be so complicated that I used a different
approach below.
if (isInstanceOfVec!T &&
T.init.content.length == size) {
// ADDED:
ali
On 1/10/21 6:37 PM, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>// OBSERVATION: Should the cast below be S?
>converted.content[i] = cast(S2) content[i];
I take that back. Yes, it should be S2. (I've been off lately. :) )
Ali
On 1/10/21 5:09 PM, Paul wrote:
> I'll paste more of my file, I hope that's ok.
Not only ok but much appreciated. :)
>> T opCast(T)() const if (is(T : Vec!(size, S2), S2)) {
The is expression can be so complicated that I used a different approach
below. I left notes in capital letters bel
On Monday, 11 January 2021 at 00:25:36 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
You don't show complete code; so, I hope I came up with
something that reflects your case.
Thank you, sadly S (S2 now) is not any specific type, sorry I'll
paste more of my file, I hope that's ok. (Sidenote, I'm not sure
it's the
On 1/10/21 7:09 PM, Paul wrote:
Is there a way to have additional template arguments in operator overloads?
The problem I'm having is mostly caused by casting a templated struct to
other templated structs. I had the following code;
T opCast(T)() const if (is(T : Vec!(vecsize, S), S)) {
T
On 1/10/21 4:09 PM, Paul wrote:
> Is there a way to have additional template arguments in operator
overloads?
I haven't tried that but the following method seems to work for you. You
don't show complete code; so, I hope I came up with something that
reflects your case.
import std;
struct
Is there a way to have additional template arguments in operator
overloads?
The problem I'm having is mostly caused by casting a templated
struct to other templated structs. I had the following code;
T opCast(T)() const if (is(T : Vec!(vecsize, S), S)) {
T converted;
static for
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 20:25:48 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 18:14:31 UTC, Paul Backus
wrote:
IMO this is one of the stupider design decisions in D, but
it's unlikely it will ever be fixed.
It is useful in several other contexts though, including user
o
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 20:26:00 UTC, Dennis wrote:
If issue 19365 got fixed
eeek I thought that was fixed but apparently not :(
so yeah alias won't work for operator overloads. Does work for
other functions so good technique to know but not here.
So for op prolly go with the strin
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 18:14:31 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
IMO this is one of the stupider design decisions in D, but it's
unlikely it will ever be fixed.
It is useful in several other contexts though, including user
overriding and private data stores for the mixin.
The easiest workar
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 18:14:31 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
IMO this is one of the stupider design decisions in D, but it's
unlikely it will ever be fixed. The easiest workaround is to
use string mixins instead, which work the way you'd expect them
to.
If issue 19365 got fixed, it could
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 18:14:31 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
Functions from different mixin templates can't overload each
other. The reason for this is that, when you mix in a mixin
template, it does not *actually* add the declarations inside it
to a current scope: instead, it adds them to
On Saturday, 12 December 2020 at 17:36:57 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
I want to wrap e.g. an int and implement basic arithmetic. In
the provided example [1] I use two mixin templates to
separately implement scaling (multiplication with int/double)
and addition and subtraction with the type its
I want to wrap e.g. an int and implement basic arithmetic. In the
provided example [1] I use two mixin templates to separately
implement scaling (multiplication with int/double) and addition
and subtraction with the type itself.
In the end I want to have several distinct wrappers and allow
s
ave a geomentry object and in one case I get x0,y0,x1,y1
and in the other case x,y,w,h
IMO that would make a lot of sense.
D doesn't do overloading based on return type.
You can do some things like return an item that alias this'd to one of
the two, and then use an accessor for the
It is easy. You can make both types as children of common parent
class myT, and when return myT.
Wouldn't it make a lot of sense to allow different opIndex
implementations based on return type?
class myC {
myT1 opIndex(int x)
myT2 opIndex(int x)
}
Depending on the types involved myC[1] woudl return myT1 or myT2.
Use-case: I have a geomentry object and in one case I get x0,
On Tuesday, 21 January 2020 at 20:48:44 UTC, Enjoys Math wrote:
I have an Integer class in integer.d. A RationalNumber class
in rational_number.d, and they each import each other (so that
could be the issue). However, this is not working:
Symbol opBinary(string op : "/")(const Integer z)
On 1/21/20 3:48 PM, Enjoys Math wrote:
I have an Integer class in integer.d. A RationalNumber class in
rational_number.d, and they each import each other (so that could be the
issue). However, this is not working:
Symbol opBinary(string op : "/")(const Integer z) const
{
retu
I have an Integer class in integer.d. A RationalNumber class in
rational_number.d, and they each import each other (so that could
be the issue). However, this is not working:
Symbol opBinary(string op : "/")(const Integer z) const
{
return new RationalNumber(this, z);
}
Getti
On Friday, 11 October 2019 at 13:13:46 UTC, Dennis wrote:
On Friday, 11 October 2019 at 12:45:59 UTC, Boyan Lazov wrote:
Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?
Nothing, it's a bug.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19476
Alright, I see
Well, the alias workaround works, so that seems just as
On Friday, 11 October 2019 at 12:45:59 UTC, Boyan Lazov wrote:
Any ideas what I'm doing wrong?
Nothing, it's a bug.
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19476
Hello,
I seem to have a problem when I use a template mixin and then try
to overload operators both in the mixin and in a struct from
where it's instantiated.
So the idea is that I have a few operators defined in the mixin,
then a few more in the struct, and I want to forward all
operations n
On Sunday, 21 April 2019 at 18:17:00 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Sunday, 21 April 2019 at 18:07:08 UTC, Ferhat Kurtulmuş
wrote:
I am writing an opencv binding and need something like: Mat m
= another_mat > 5;
D does not support that. The comparison operators are always
just true or false (as
On Sunday, 21 April 2019 at 18:07:08 UTC, Ferhat Kurtulmuş wrote:
I am writing an opencv binding and need something like: Mat m =
another_mat > 5;
D does not support that. The comparison operators are always just
true or false (as determined by the int opCmp or the bool
opEquals returns), the
I am writing an opencv binding and need something like: Mat m =
another_mat > 5;
Docs does not cover this sitiuation:
https://dlang.org/spec/operatoroverloading.html#compare
opBinary does not support those operators, and Section
"Overloading <, <=, >, and >=" descr
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 04:29:22PM -0700, Ali Çehreli via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On 03/15/2019 03:48 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
[...]
> > Ali's example was unfortunately deceptively formatted.
>
> My editor did that. :)
This is why I don't trust auto-formatters. ;-)
> On my work computer, I'v
On 03/15/2019 03:48 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:30:41PM +, eXodiquas via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:46:50 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
[...]
Or use template constraints:
struct Vector {
Vector opBinary(string op)(Vector rhs)
if (op =
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 10:30:41PM +, eXodiquas via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:46:50 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
[...]
> > Or use template constraints:
> >
> > struct Vector {
> > Vector opBinary(string op)(Vector rhs)
> > if (op == "+") {
> > return V
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 09:35:12PM +, eXodiquas via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
[...]
> Vector opBinary(string op)(Vector rhs)
> {
> static if (op == "+") return Vector(this.x + rhs.x, this.y + rhs.y);
> else static if (op == "-") return Vector(this.x - rhs.x, this.y -
> rhs.y);
> }
>
16.03.2019 1:30, eXodiquas пишет:
On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:46:50 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 03/15/2019 02:43 PM, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:35:12 UTC, eXodiquas wrote:
Is there any way to achive this behaivour with D2?
Yep. Just make the return type in the f
On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:46:50 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 03/15/2019 02:43 PM, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:35:12 UTC, eXodiquas wrote:
Is there any way to achive this behaivour with D2?
Yep. Just make the return type in the function declaration
`auto`. You ar
On 03/15/2019 02:43 PM, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:35:12 UTC, eXodiquas wrote:
Is there any way to achive this behaivour with D2?
Yep. Just make the return type in the function declaration `auto`. You
are then free to return a different type in each static branch.
On Friday, 15 March 2019 at 21:35:12 UTC, eXodiquas wrote:
Is there any way to achive this behaivour with D2?
Yep. Just make the return type in the function declaration
`auto`. You are then free to return a different type in each
static branch.
Hi everyone,
i'm currently working on a small physics engine and I thought it
would be a nice feature to overload the operators of my vector
struct so I don't have to make ugly function calls just to add
and "multiply" my vectors. The problem now is that overloadi
On Thursday, 14 March 2019 at 19:39:53 UTC, Alec Stewart wrote:
For < and >, would one do this?
I think you'd benefit a lot by reading
http://ddili.org/ders/d.en/operator_overloading.html (just search
for opCmp). I bet that will eliminate most of your confusion !
On Thursday, 14 March 2019 at 18:25:17 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 06:07:46PM +, Alec Stewart via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: [...]
bool opEquals(ref const Interval i) const {
// probably would be a bit more than just this, but
for this issue
// let's
On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 06:07:46PM +, Alec Stewart via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
[...]
> bool opEquals(ref const Interval i) const {
> // probably would be a bit more than just this, but for this issue
> // let's just stick with this.
> return d_start.opEquals(othe
bother with operator overloading here, or just make
a member function?
You shouldn't often call .opEquals yourself, just write a == b
and let the compiler translate it if it needs to.
uals` are callable using argument
types `(const(ulong), const(ulong))`, candidates are:` and it
doesn't say the candidates.
So should I bother with operator overloading here, or just make a
member function?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aho%E2%80%93Corasick_algorithm
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 12:36:39 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
Since both your opOpAssigns match equally, the compiler throws
up. The solution is to add some sort of restriction:
This doesn't happen apparently: the operator has a left and a
right side, even if both types define the operat
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 13:20:01 UTC, aliak wrote:
"void opOpAssign(string op, T)(ref Tthis, const ref T x)" looks
like the wrong signature for opOpAssign.
Oh I'll put on my stupid hat now...
I realize I had copy-pasted the wrong syntax from the global
function attempt, but I swear
hoice is not as advantageous as I
think, and I may change this design from structs to classes, or
else the code duplication would be small and never subject to
change. But now I'm just trying for the sake of learning to
find out what works or not in terms of templated operator
overloading, an
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 11:58:25 UTC, XavierAP wrote:
When I want to have the same operator overloading code in both
types however, I can't make it work:
From https://dlang.org/spec/operatoroverloading.html#binary:
"the one with the ‘better’ match is selected. It is an error
gn from structs to classes, or else the code
duplication would be small and never subject to change. But now
I'm just trying for the sake of learning to find out what works
or not in terms of templated operator overloading, and whether
the reason something doesn't work is by design
On Saturday, 28 April 2018 at 11:52:50 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
unless you're declaring the type as a class purely so that it's
forced to be a reference type.
You can do a struct as a reference type too - just make it a
pimpl handle.
optimize and remove table of virtual functions because in these
> examples we see no method overloading.
>
> Thanks.
Object has virtual functions, so it's not possible to ever remove the
virtual table from a D class.
Also, even if Object didn't have virtual functions, I do
classes don't have any vtables. What about D? In D
all methods are virtual by default in classes. Will complier
optimize and remove table of virtual functions because in these
examples we see no method overloading.
Thanks.
On Thursday, 22 February 2018 at 21:12:45 UTC, JN wrote:
Is this expected behaviour?
bar.d
---
void foo(string s)
{
}
app.d
---
import std.stdio;
import bar;
void foo(int x)
{
}
void main()
{
foo("hi");
};
===
Error: function app.foo (int x) is not callable using argument
types (string
JN wrote:
same idea?
absolutely the same. non-qualified imports (be it template, or function)
won't take part in overload resoultion.
On Thursday, 22 February 2018 at 21:19:12 UTC, ketmar wrote:
yes. this is done so unqualified won't silently "steal" your
functions. this can cause some unexpected (and hard to find)
bugs.
if you want it to work, you can either do qualified import
import bar : foo;
or manuall bring
JN wrote:
Is this expected behaviour?
bar.d
---
void foo(string s)
{
}
app.d
---
import std.stdio;
import bar;
void foo(int x)
{
}
void main()
{
foo("hi");
};
===
Error: function app.foo (int x) is not callable using argument types
(string)
yes. this is done so unqualified won't si
1 - 100 of 577 matches
Mail list logo
