digitalmars.D - Mixining structs
- Victor Nakoryakov (16/16) Jun 14 2005 Hi all. I have small suggestion. It would be nice if I'll able do
- Jarrett Billingsley (19/23) Jun 14 2005 Seems like kind of a niche feature (that is, a feature without much use)...
- Victor Nakoryakov (9/41) Jun 15 2005 Theoretically this is true. But in the reality when this isn't single
- Jarrett Billingsley (5/9) Jun 15 2005 Well, in that case, you might as well just ask for struct inheritance. ...
- Victor Nakoryakov (11/26) Jun 15 2005 Inheritance is too complex solution for D structs which are some kind of...
- Eugene Pelekhay (5/31) Jun 15 2005 Single inheritance it's very simple solution. And there is no need for
Hi all. I have small suggestion. It would be nice if I'll able do
following thing:
struct MyStruct
{
int a, b, c;
float x, y, z;
}
struct AnotherStruct
{
mixin MyStruct;
real p, q, r;
}
I.e. in cases when a struct name is an argument for a mixin treat it as
template with no parameters. This will give some resemblance of struct
inheritance and some few another benefits.
What do you think?
Jun 14 2005
"Victor Nakoryakov" <nail-mail mail.ru> wrote in message news:d8m359$ivq$1 digitaldaemon.com...I.e. in cases when a struct name is an argument for a mixin treat it as template with no parameters. This will give some resemblance of struct inheritance and some few another benefits. What do you think?Seems like kind of a niche feature (that is, a feature without much use). We can already do: template MyStruct_Members() { int x; float y; } struct MyStruct { mixin MyStruct_Members; } struct MyStructInherited { mixin MyStruct_Members; char[] z; } It's not that much more work to just make a new template.
Jun 14 2005
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:"Victor Nakoryakov" <nail-mail mail.ru> wrote in message news:d8m359$ivq$1 digitaldaemon.com...Theoretically this is true. But in the reality when this isn't single instance, structs are longer then 3 lines code became less and less readable. This is elegant and simple to implement (I think) feature. Why not?! -- Victor Nakoryakov nail-mail<at>mail<dot>ru Krasnoznamensk, Moscow, RussiaI.e. in cases when a struct name is an argument for a mixin treat it as template with no parameters. This will give some resemblance of struct inheritance and some few another benefits. What do you think?Seems like kind of a niche feature (that is, a feature without much use). We can already do: template MyStruct_Members() { int x; float y; } struct MyStruct { mixin MyStruct_Members; } struct MyStructInherited { mixin MyStruct_Members; char[] z; } It's not that much more work to just make a new template.
Jun 15 2005
"Victor Nakoryakov" <nail-mail mail.ru> wrote in message news:d8ouib$30ii$1 digitaldaemon.com...Theoretically this is true. But in the reality when this isn't single instance, structs are longer then 3 lines code became less and less readable. This is elegant and simple to implement (I think) feature. Why not?!Well, in that case, you might as well just ask for struct inheritance. It'd make things easier on the programmer, especially for casting. I'd love to see struct inheritance.
Jun 15 2005
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:"Victor Nakoryakov" <nail-mail mail.ru> wrote in message news:d8ouib$30ii$1 digitaldaemon.com...Inheritance is too complex solution for D structs which are some kind of scalar in D paradigm. This will raise problem with vtbls etc, etc and structs will become classes just with another keyword to declare it like in C++. Mixining on the other hand has not such problems and gives ability to emulate multiple inheritance. -- Victor Nakoryakov nail-mail<at>mail<dot>ru Krasnoznamensk, Moscow, RussiaTheoretically this is true. But in the reality when this isn't single instance, structs are longer then 3 lines code became less and less readable. This is elegant and simple to implement (I think) feature. Why not?!Well, in that case, you might as well just ask for struct inheritance. It'd make things easier on the programmer, especially for casting. I'd love to see struct inheritance.
Jun 15 2005
Eugene Pelekhay <pelekhay gmail.com> Victor Nakoryakov wrote:Jarrett Billingsley wrote:Single inheritance it's very simple solution. And there is no need for vtbl to implement it. Inherited structure is always binary compatible with base struct it's only extending it by new fields and/or non virtual methods. Or may be You mean inheriting structures from interfaces?"Victor Nakoryakov" <nail-mail mail.ru> wrote in message news:d8ouib$30ii$1 digitaldaemon.com...Inheritance is too complex solution for D structs which are some kind of scalar in D paradigm. This will raise problem with vtbls etc, etc and structs will become classes just with another keyword to declare it like in C++. Mixining on the other hand has not such problems and gives ability to emulate multiple inheritance.Theoretically this is true. But in the reality when this isn't single instance, structs are longer then 3 lines code became less and less readable. This is elegant and simple to implement (I think) feature. Why not?!Well, in that case, you might as well just ask for struct inheritance. It'd make things easier on the programmer, especially for casting. I'd love to see struct inheritance.
Jun 15 2005