## D - operator~

• Pavel Minayev (30/30) Mar 02 2002 It looks a bit strange to me... for example, compare these
• Walter (3/33) Mar 02 2002 It does sound like a logical extension. I'll add it in to the list! -Wal...
• Pavel Minayev (10/11) Mar 02 2002 list! -Walter
• Walter (3/11) Mar 02 2002 What's in the spec right now should be 1.0. -Walter
• Pavel Minayev (3/4) Mar 03 2002 Any (probably approximate) release date? Or "when it's done"?
• Walter (3/7) Mar 03 2002 The release date was 6 months ago .
• Walter (3/5) Mar 02 2002 Just realized "b" won't work, it's a hex digit. There goes consistency!
• OddesE (9/14) Mar 02 2002 So bt then? Or by?
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> writes:
```It looks a bit strange to me... for example, compare these
two lines of code:

int[] a;
...
a ~= 1;      // works
a = a ~ 1;   // doesn't work!

Looks weird... why can't I concatenate an int array and a
single interger? Furthermore, I believe that the following
should work as well:

a = 1 ~ a;
a = 1 ~ 2;

Take a look at the latter - binary ~ should make an array
out of its operands if they aren't already arrays. This
could be a very useful operation, since it practically
replaces array literals:

double max(double[] n) { ... }
double a, b, c, d;
...
d = max(a ~ b ~ c);

Using suffices, array of almost any built-in type can be
constructed:

1 ~   2 ~   3        int[]
1U ~  2U ~  3U        uint[]
1L ~  2L ~  3L        long[]
1UL ~ 2UL ~ 3UL        ulong[]
1.0 ~ 2.0 ~ 3.0        double[]
...............................

Only byte and short don't have their suffices (BTW, why
not? "b" and "s" would suite just fine).

What do you think of this, Walter? Is it a good idea?
```
Mar 02 2002
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
```It does sound like a logical extension. I'll add it in to the list! -Walter

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a5qbcq\$1kss\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
It looks a bit strange to me... for example, compare these
two lines of code:

int[] a;
...
a ~= 1;      // works
a = a ~ 1;   // doesn't work!

Looks weird... why can't I concatenate an int array and a
single interger? Furthermore, I believe that the following
should work as well:

a = 1 ~ a;
a = 1 ~ 2;

Take a look at the latter - binary ~ should make an array
out of its operands if they aren't already arrays. This
could be a very useful operation, since it practically
replaces array literals:

double max(double[] n) { ... }
double a, b, c, d;
...
d = max(a ~ b ~ c);

Using suffices, array of almost any built-in type can be
constructed:

1 ~   2 ~   3        int[]
1U ~  2U ~  3U        uint[]
1L ~  2L ~  3L        long[]
1UL ~ 2UL ~ 3UL        ulong[]
1.0 ~ 2.0 ~ 3.0        double[]
...............................

Only byte and short don't have their suffices (BTW, why
not? "b" and "s" would suite just fine).

What do you think of this, Walter? Is it a good idea?

```
Mar 02 2002
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> writes:
```"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a5r2rl\$1uiq\$1 digitaldaemon.com...

It does sound like a logical extension. I'll add it in to the

list! -Walter

Great to hear that!

By the way, with all those feature requests around... =)
You've mentioned several times that some things will be implemented
sooner or later, but probably won't get into version 1. Do you
have any "feature list" of what gets there, then? Templates are
should we expect by DMD 1.0 release, whenever it happens?
```
Mar 02 2002
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
```"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a5r4r7\$1vic\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a5r2rl\$1uiq\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
By the way, with all those feature requests around... =)
You've mentioned several times that some things will be implemented
sooner or later, but probably won't get into version 1. Do you
have any "feature list" of what gets there, then? Templates are
should we expect by DMD 1.0 release, whenever it happens?

What's in the spec right now should be 1.0. -Walter
```
Mar 02 2002
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> writes:
```"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a5rmmi\$26rg\$1 digitaldaemon.com...

What's in the spec right now should be 1.0. -Walter

Any (probably approximate) release date? Or "when it's done"?
```
Mar 03 2002
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
```"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a5u2l6\$fll\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a5rmmi\$26rg\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
What's in the spec right now should be 1.0. -Walter

Any (probably approximate) release date? Or "when it's done"?

The release date was 6 months ago <g>.
```
Mar 03 2002
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
```"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a5qbcq\$1kss\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
Only byte and short don't have their suffices (BTW, why
not? "b" and "s" would suite just fine).

Just realized "b" won't work, it's a hex digit. There goes consistency!
```
Mar 02 2002
"OddesE" <OddesE_XYZ hotmail.com> writes:
```"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:a5rr4o\$28uv\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
"Pavel Minayev" <evilone omen.ru> wrote in message
news:a5qbcq\$1kss\$1 digitaldaemon.com...
Only byte and short don't have their suffices (BTW, why
not? "b" and "s" would suite just fine).

Just realized "b" won't work, it's a hex digit. There goes consistency!

So bt then? Or by?

--
Stijn
OddesE_XYZ hotmail.com
http://OddesE.cjb.net
__________________________________________