On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 05:07:17 UTC, jfondren wrote:
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 04:51:48 UTC, someone wrote:
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 04:30:12 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
So a field that will automatically be resolved to as part of
the behavior of generated toString methods.
No. A d
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 04:51:48 UTC, someone wrote:
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 04:30:12 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
So a field that will automatically be resolved to as part of
the behavior of generated toString methods.
No. A default property can be another object altogether. The
best
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 04:30:12 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
So a field that will automatically be resolved to as part of
the behavior of generated toString methods.
No. A default property can be another object altogether. The best
use case I can think of is a default collection for a cla
So a field that will automatically be resolved to as part of the
behavior of generated toString methods.
That really isn't what alias this is used for commonly. I.e.
struct ValueReference {
private {
SomethingElse* impl;
}
bool isNull() { return impl is
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 00:57:47 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 00:52:43 UTC, someone wrote:
Now that I am aware of Walter's stance on alias this:
"alias this has turned out to be a mistake" @
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28029184
... would you, I mean the co
On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 00:52:43 UTC, someone wrote:
Now that I am aware of Walter's stance on alias this:
"alias this has turned out to be a mistake" @
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28029184
... would you, I mean the community, think is it a good idea to
file a DIP to eventually
Now that I am aware of Walter's stance on alias this:
"alias this has turned out to be a mistake" @
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28029184
... would you, I mean the community, think is it a good idea to
file a DIP to eventually get a new attribute to unambiguously
label a class' defau
