www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - [TDPL] arrays of D future

reply Tyro[a.c.edwards] <no.spam home.com> writes:
Andrei,

I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you forecasting
future functionality that arrays will support with your
use of .empty, .back, and .popBack or am I too naïve to understand
that I need to implement this functionality in order for your example
to compile?
Jun 27 2010
parent reply Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> writes:
 wrote:

 Andrei,
 
 I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
 question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you forecasting
 future functionality that arrays will support with your use of .empty, .back,
 and .popBack or am I too na�ve to understand that I need to implement this
 functionality in order for your example to compile?
These functions are implemented in std.array, you only need to import that module.
Jun 27 2010
next sibling parent Tyro[a.c.edwards] <no.spam home.com> writes:
== Quote from Lutger (lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com)'s article
  wrote:
 Andrei,

 I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
 question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you
forecasting
 future functionality that arrays will support with your use of
.empty, .back,
 and .popBack or am I too na�ve to understand that I need to
implement this
 functionality in order for your example to compile?
These functions are implemented in std.array, you only need to
import that
 module.
Thanks.
Jun 27 2010
prev sibling parent reply "Simen kjaeraas" <simen.kjaras gmail.com> writes:
Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> wrote:

  wrote:

 Andrei,

 I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
 question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you  =
 forecasting
 future functionality that arrays will support with your use of .empty=
, =
 .back,
 and .popBack or am I too na=EF=BF=BDve to understand that I need to i=
mplement =
 this
 functionality in order for your example to compile?
These functions are implemented in std.array, you only need to import =
=
 that
 module.
Now why aren't those included by default? Sure, they're not always necessary, but they are what makes arrays into ranges, a property that has touted extensively. -- = Simen
Jun 27 2010
parent reply Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> writes:
Simen kjaeraas wrote:

 Lutger <lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com> wrote:
 
  wrote:

 Andrei,

 I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
 question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you
 forecasting
 future functionality that arrays will support with your use of .empty,
 .back,
 and .popBack or am I too na�ve to understand that I need to implement
 this
 functionality in order for your example to compile?
These functions are implemented in std.array, you only need to import that module.
Now why aren't those included by default? Sure, they're not always necessary, but they are what makes arrays into ranges, a property that has touted extensively.
A public import of std.array by std.algorithm could do the trick.
Jun 27 2010
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2010-06-27 14:42, Lutger wrote:
 Simen kjaeraas wrote:

 Lutger<lutger.blijdestijn gmail.com>  wrote:

   wrote:

 Andrei,

 I must say that the reading is absolutely enjoyable. I do have one
 question regarding the StackImpl example on page 234. Are you
 forecasting
 future functionality that arrays will support with your use of .empty,
 .back,
 and .popBack or am I too na�ve to understand that I need to implement
 this
 functionality in order for your example to compile?
These functions are implemented in std.array, you only need to import that module.
Now why aren't those included by default? Sure, they're not always necessary, but they are what makes arrays into ranges, a property that has touted extensively.
A public import of std.array by std.algorithm could do the trick.
Or the opposite, depending how you look at it. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Jun 27 2010