• Miguel Ferreira Simões (11/11) Jan 16 2005 Can I have your opinion about this issue:
• Regan Heath (14/23) Jan 16 2005 or at the very least have some way of combining _arguments and _argptr
• Matthew (2/23) Jan 26 2005 Third'ed
• pragma (5/10) Jan 27 2005 Sexy. Especially since it lets you build your own vararg lists from scr...
• Carlos Santander B. (4/18) Jan 31 2005 FWIW, I agree with this (or any other way to accomplish it).
• =?UTF-8?B?QW5kZXJzIEYgQmrDtnJrbHVuZA==?= (16/32) Feb 03 2005 The only way to do it now is to use the workaround:

"Miguel Ferreira Simões" <Kobold netcabo.pt> writes:

Can I have your opinion about this issue:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/11254.html

In my humble opinion, I think we should be able to write:

void function1(...) {

}

void function2(...) {
    function1(...);
}

Is there any problem with this notation?

Thanks,

Miguel Ferreira Simoes 

"Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> writes:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:31:09 -0000, Miguel Ferreira Simões  
<Kobold netcabo.pt> wrote:
 Can I have your opinion about this issue:
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/11254.html

 In my humble opinion, I think we should be able to write:

 void function1(...) {

 }

 void function2(...) {
     function1(...);
 }

or at the very least have some way of combining _arguments and _argptr  
back into a ...

void function1(...) {
}
void function2(...) {
   function1(vararg(_arguments,_argptr));
}

or as an even more powerful and generic solution some mechanism to allow  
you to pass all a functions arguments to another function, sort of like a  
nested function does.

 Is there any problem with this notation?

It doesn't seem ambiguous to me.

Regan

"Matthew" <admin.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:

"Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> wrote in message
news:opskp5xzxa23k2f5 ally...
 On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:31:09 -0000, Miguel Ferreira Simões 
<Kobold netcabo.pt> wrote:
 Can I have your opinion about this issue:
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/11254.html

 In my humble opinion, I think we should be able to write:

 void function1(...) {

 }

 void function2(...) {
     function1(...);
 }

 or at the very least have some way of combining _arguments and _argptr  back
into a ...

 void function1(...) {
 }
 void function2(...) {
   function1(vararg(_arguments,_argptr));
 }

 or as an even more powerful and generic solution some mechanism to allow  you
to pass all a functions arguments to 
 another function, sort of like a  nested function does.

Third'ed

pragma <pragma_member pathlink.com> writes:

"Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> wrote in message 
 void function1(...) {
 }
 void function2(...) {
   function1(vararg(_arguments,_argptr));
 }

Sexy.  Especially since it lets you build your own vararg lists from scratch.
The only other way to accomplish *that* would be to write a shim.  

This *definately* gets my vote. 

- EricAnderton at yahoo

"Carlos Santander B." <csantander619 gmail.com> writes:

Regan Heath wrote:
 or at the very least have some way of combining _arguments and _argptr  
 back into a ...
 
 void function1(...) {
 }
 void function2(...) {
   function1(vararg(_arguments,_argptr));
 }
 
 or as an even more powerful and generic solution some mechanism to 
 allow  you to pass all a functions arguments to another function, sort 
 of like a  nested function does.
 
 Regan

FWIW, I agree with this (or any other way to accomplish it).

_______________________
Carlos Santander Bernal

=?UTF-8?B?QW5kZXJzIEYgQmrDtnJrbHVuZA==?= <afb algonet.se> writes:

Carlos Santander B. wrote:

 or at the very least have some way of combining _arguments and 
 _argptr  back into a ...

 void function1(...) {
 }
 void function2(...) {
   function1(vararg(_arguments,_argptr));
 }

 or as an even more powerful and generic solution some mechanism to 
 allow  you to pass all a functions arguments to another function, sort 
 of like a  nested function does.

 Regan

 
 FWIW, I agree with this (or any other way to accomplish it).

The only way to do it now is to use the workaround:

void helper(TypeInfo[] arguments, va_list argptr)
{
}

void function1(...) {
  helper(_arguments,_argptr);
}
void function2(...) {
  helper(_arguments,_argptr);
}

But that does not let you modify the argument list.
(e.g. if you want to add or remove any arguments)

Assuming that va_list is (void*) is *not* portable.
Using std.stdarg's va_arg is the way to get them out...

--anders