• Era Scarecrow <rtcvb32 yahoo.com> Jan 24 2012

Era Scarecrow <rtcvb32 yahoo.com> writes:

 The builtin associative arrays of D.=A0 i.e.:
=20
 int[string] aa;


 I could tell it was a container. Guess this shows how far I'm not looking =
(or behind) with the details of implementation.

 If key, it must be read only, since keys must be immutable.
=20
 If value, it could potentially be read/write.


 That's what I thought... I'd think keys could be mutable; However the hash=
 would have to be recalculated afterwards. That would be for very rare proj=
ects (effectively removing it, adding it back in), but I don't really see i=
t happening. Manually doing it is likely safer and easier to follow.

 properties are methods.=A0 There should be a way to pass
 a delegate to a=A0=20
 property function, not allowing this would be unnecessarily
 limiting.=A0=A0=A0
 Some sort of __traits directive comes to mind...


 Yes I know that part. Just go with what makes the most sense. In my mind s=
omething should be a property if it doesn't do anything really, and has spe=
cific limitations on what it decides to do; Example:

 A Getter: Like (.length), you get the length/size and that's it. No side e=
ffects, no generating new objects (not counting dup)
 A Setter (or lack of): Returning void (or the object/structure called), Ma=
y change the structure, but only doing exactly what you expect it to do.

 I guess more importantly I'd need an example of how passing a method like =
that to a delegate could be useful. I'd need a reasonable example, not just=
 syntax. The only time that might be useful, like if somewhere in the calli=
ng it might change size; But for arrays that can reallocate then you may en=
d up with the old array and not the newer one defeating the purpose.

 I'll leave whatever decisions to you guys. And I'm glad to see how fast bu=
gfixes have been progressing recently.