www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Extend with to take multiple arguments

reply Amex <Amex gmail.com> writes:
with(A){with(B){with(C){
is quite annoying...

Rather,

allow

with(A,B,C){

Also, B is checked to come from A so one does not have to do

with(A, A.B, A.B.C)

also

have an opWith which is similar to opDispatch for With overriding.
Jun 04 2019
parent reply ag0aep6g <anonymous example.com> writes:
On 05.06.19 02:57, Amex wrote:

 with(A){with(B){with(C){
 is quite annoying...


You don't need the braces.

with (A) with (B) with (C)
{
     ...
}
Jun 04 2019
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.com> writes:
On 6/5/19 1:15 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:

 On 05.06.19 02:57, Amex wrote:

 with(A){with(B){with(C){
 is quite annoying...


 
 You don't need the braces.
 
 with (A) with (B) with (C)
 {
      ...
 }


Wow this must be the shortest and most satisfying thread ever.
Jun 05 2019
parent reply 12345swordy <alexanderheistermann gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 5 June 2019 at 20:10:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 On 6/5/19 1:15 AM, ag0aep6g wrote:

 On 05.06.19 02:57, Amex wrote:

 with(A){with(B){with(C){
 is quite annoying...


 
 You don't need the braces.
 
 with (A) with (B) with (C)
 {
      ...
 }


 Wow this must be the shortest and most satisfying thread ever.



you can initialize a class like this:
var exp = new Class { };

That is just my opinion though.

Alex
Jun 05 2019
next sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 5 June 2019 at 21:02:39 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:

 tbh I found the with keyword to be unnecessarily verbiage. In 

 var exp = new Class { };


What does that have to do with the `with` keyword?
Jun 05 2019
parent reply Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 00:29:33 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Wednesday, 5 June 2019 at 21:02:39 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:

 tbh I found the with keyword to be unnecessarily verbiage. In 

 var exp = new Class { };


 What does that have to do with the `with` keyword?



directly initialize class members in the curly brackets:

var exp = new Something() {
     SomeMember = 42
}

So you get shorter syntax to init class members, without the need 
for a "with" keyword.
Jun 06 2019
next sibling parent Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 07:19:15 UTC, Laurent Tréguier wrote:


 directly initialize class members in the curly brackets:


Oh yeah, I see,

I usually use with for existing things, like

with(MyEnum) ...

so it didn't come to my mind.
Jun 06 2019
prev sibling parent Amex <Amex gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 07:19:15 UTC, Laurent Tréguier wrote:

 On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 00:29:33 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Wednesday, 5 June 2019 at 21:02:39 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:

 tbh I found the with keyword to be unnecessarily verbiage. In 

 var exp = new Class { };


 What does that have to do with the `with` keyword?



 directly initialize class members in the curly brackets:

 var exp = new Something() {
     SomeMember = 42
 }

 So you get shorter syntax to init class members, without the 
 need for a "with" keyword.


I don't use with just to initalize but many things... it cuts 
down having to specify a reference.

with(XX) with(YY)
{
    swith(q}
    {
       case a
    }

    if (b)

    foo(y)
    }
}


where q,a,b,y all come from XX and YY.

Having to specify all the withs gets redundant(since it has to be 
done for each scope, I usually use it at the function level).
Jun 06 2019
prev sibling parent reply Bastiaan Veelo <Bastiaan Veelo.net> writes:
On Wednesday, 5 June 2019 at 21:02:39 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:


 var exp = new Class { };

 That is just my opinion though.

 Alex


I don’t understand your point. How is that different from D?

  auto exp = new class {};

https://run.dlang.io/is/mupnDT

Bastiaan.
Jun 05 2019
parent reply Simen =?UTF-8?B?S2rDpnLDpXM=?= <simen.kjaras gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 06:53:00 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:

 On Wednesday, 5 June 2019 at 21:02:39 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:


 var exp = new Class { };

 That is just my opinion though.

 Alex


 I don’t understand your point. How is that different from D?

  auto exp = new class {};

 https://run.dlang.io/is/mupnDT

 Bastiaan.


First, new Class has different capitalization, so it's not an 
anonymous class like in your code. Second, I believe 12345swordy 
omitted some parts of his intended code, so a more correct 
example would be:

     class Class {
         int n;
         string s;
     }

     var exp = new Class { n = 4, s = "foo" };

This, D doesn't do. The equivalent would be:

     class Class {
         int n;
         string s;
     }

     auto exp = new Class();
     with (exp) {
         n = 4;
         s = "foo";
     }

--
   Simen
Jun 06 2019
parent reply 12345swordy <alexanderheistermann gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 07:22:38 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:

 On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 06:53:00 UTC, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:

 [...]


 First, new Class has different capitalization, so it's not an 
 anonymous class like in your code. Second, I believe 
 12345swordy omitted some parts of his intended code, so a more 
 correct example would be:

     class Class {
         int n;
         string s;
     }

     var exp = new Class { n = 4, s = "foo" };

 This, D doesn't do. The equivalent would be:

     class Class {
         int n;
         string s;
     }

     auto exp = new Class();
     with (exp) {
         n = 4;
         s = "foo";
     }

 --
   Simen


Exactly, what I meant, thank you Simen.

Alex
Jun 06 2019
parent Bastiaan Veelo <Bastiaan Veelo.net> writes:
On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 14:36:57 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:

 On Thursday, 6 June 2019 at 07:22:38 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:

     class Class {
         int n;
         string s;
     }

     var exp = new Class { n = 4, s = "foo" };

 This, D doesn't do. The equivalent would be:

     class Class {
         int n;
         string s;
     }

     auto exp = new Class();
     with (exp) {
         n = 4;
         s = "foo";
     }

 --
   Simen


 Exactly, what I meant, thank you Simen.

 Alex


I see. I played with this a bit. Just for fun, there is an 
alternative without “with” and without repeating the object name. 
It’s not shorter nor prettier, and it’s not quite the same :-) 
Anyway:

    auto exp = new class Class { this() {
         n = 4; s = "foo";
    } };

https://run.dlang.io/is/EcC8KK

Bastiaan.
Jun 06 2019