• Heretic <Heretic_member pathlink.com> Dec 01 2003
• Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> Dec 02 2003
• Berin Loritsch <bloritsch d-haven.org> Dec 02 2003
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Dec 19 2003

Heretic <Heretic_member pathlink.com> writes:

quote
{
i don't want to keep it explicit with a keyword or token.
oh, and i want to get rid of templates that are like namespaces. eighter we get
namespaces, and can add template parameters to it, or no namespaces at all.
namespaces or not, i want templates for functions, and for classes.
instance Swap(int).call(a,b); is just plain stupid..
instance(int) swap(a,b); would be nice, for example..but
swap(a,b); is still unbeatable....
}

quote
{
The instance() form of instantiation is a nuisance that I never 
understood the need for. Is it just because the are no unambiguous 
parantheses "left"? I'm sure we can find some unused token to replace 
the <>! If you use templates a lot then all this "instance" stuff 
becomes starts getting on your nerves quickly. And it doesn't exactly 
make the code more readable either...
}

return true;

Doesnt this seem like the D standard is kinda oriented towards easy compiler
generation and fast compilation ? It isn`t always a good thing... dont get me
wrong, i have never coded a compiler so i dont know how hard it is to code this
stuff... but this template instantiation syntax pisses me off :/

Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> writes:

Heretic wrote:
 Doesnt this seem like the D standard is kinda oriented towards easy compiler
 generation and fast compilation ? It isn`t always a good thing... dont get me
 wrong, i have never coded a compiler so i dont know how hard it is to code this
 stuff... but this template instantiation syntax pisses me off :/


I'm all for making a few tradeoffs for the sake of compiler simplicity, 
but I think good, convenient generic programming support is one of those 
things that's worth suffering a few contortions for.

  -- andy

Berin Loritsch <bloritsch d-haven.org> writes:

Andy Friesen wrote:

 Heretic wrote:
 
 Doesnt this seem like the D standard is kinda oriented towards easy 
 compiler
 generation and fast compilation ? It isn`t always a good thing... dont 
 get me
 wrong, i have never coded a compiler so i dont know how hard it is to 
 code this
 stuff... but this template instantiation syntax pisses me off :/


 
 I'm all for making a few tradeoffs for the sake of compiler simplicity, 
 but I think good, convenient generic programming support is one of those 
 things that's worth suffering a few contortions for.
 
  -- andy
 


Hmm.  I would expect to do:

list<int> intList = new list<int>;

or even

list<list<int>> listOfIntLists = new list<list<int>>;

Granted, I might (for my own convenience sake) do a typedef for these
types:

typedef list<int> intlist;
typedef list<intlist> intcartesian;

But I would expect those types of decisions to be my perogative as a
developer.

Is there regexp support in D?  It might simplify checking for certain
types of matches.

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

"Berin Loritsch" <bloritsch d-haven.org> wrote in message
news:bqielr$29c4$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Is there regexp support in D?  It might simplify checking for certain
 types of matches.


import std.regexp;

at your service!