• Sean Kelly (3/3) May 17 2004 Besides that function pointers can only point to static (nested)
• Stewart Gordon (30/32) May 19 2004 Welcome to OOP.
• Sean Kelly (10/14) May 20 2004 Ah, that was what I was missing. As C++ doesn't support nested
• Andy Friesen (6/22) May 20 2004 The C concept of static certainly does not apply to D. If you want a

Sean Kelly <sean ffwd.cx> writes:

Besides that function pointers can only point to static (nested) 
functions, is there any difference?

Sean

Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:

Sean Kelly wrote:

 Besides that function pointers can only point to static (nested) 
 functions, is there any difference?

Welcome to OOP.

A static function is one that is a member of a class, but operates on 
the class itself, not on an object of the class.  Just as a static 
variable belongs to the class, rather than to each object of the class. 
  Hence there is no concept of 'this' in a static function.

	class Qwert {
		static int yuiop;
		int asdfg;

		static void hjkl() {
			printf("%d\n", yuiop);	// valid
			printf("%d\n", asdfg);	// invalid
		}

		void zxcvb() {
			printf("%d\n", yuiop);	// valid
			printf("%d\n", asdfg);	// also valid
		}

		static void nm() {
			hjkl();		// valid
			zxcvb();	// invalid
		}
	}

If you're nesting functions within functions, then the same applies. 
Here, the concept of 'object' is more or less replaced by 'stack frame', 
corresponding to a call to the enclosing function.

Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox, aside from its being the 
unfortunate victim of intensive mail-bombing at the moment.  Please keep 
replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.

Sean Kelly <sean ffwd.cx> writes:

Stewart Gordon wrote:
 
 If you're nesting functions within functions, then the same applies. 
 Here, the concept of 'object' is more or less replaced by 'stack frame', 
 corresponding to a call to the enclosing function.

Ah, that was what I was missing.  As C++ doesn't support nested 
functions I wasn't sure how the keyword applied outside of the class 
context.  Just to clarify, how does the classic definition of "static" 
as it applies to global symbols in C operate in D?  If I declare a 
global variable or free function static, does it have any effect at all? 
  Can I still assume that a D module and its imports rougly corresponds 
to a translation unit and that global statics will follow the classic 
visibility rules?

Sean

Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> writes:

Sean Kelly wrote:
 Stewart Gordon wrote:
 
 If you're nesting functions within functions, then the same applies. 
 Here, the concept of 'object' is more or less replaced by 'stack 
 frame', corresponding to a call to the enclosing function.

 
 
 Ah, that was what I was missing.  As C++ doesn't support nested 
 functions I wasn't sure how the keyword applied outside of the class 
 context.  Just to clarify, how does the classic definition of "static" 
 as it applies to global symbols in C operate in D?  If I declare a 
 global variable or free function static, does it have any effect at all? 
  Can I still assume that a D module and its imports rougly corresponds 
 to a translation unit and that global statics will follow the classic 
 visibility rules?

The C concept of static certainly does not apply to D.  If you want a 
symbol to be local to the module, use the 'private' access modifier instead.

I think static is ignored in the global scope. (I'm not sure if it ought 
to be a syntax error, as it might be handy in the case of mixins)

  -- andy