www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 277] New: Named mixin operator resolution

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=277

           Summary: Named mixin operator resolution
           Product: D
           Version: 0.163
          Platform: PC
        OS/Version: Windows
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: bugzilla digitalmars.com
        ReportedBy: xergen hotmail.com


template TestMixin(){
    void opCall()    {
    }

    void opCatAssign(uint val)    {
    }
}

class Test{
    mixin TestMixin bar;

    void foo(){
    //bar(); // doesn't work !?!?
    bar.opCall(); // works
    //bar ~= 3; // doesn't work
    bar.opCatAssign(3); // works
    }
}

void main(char[][] args){
    Test t = new Test();
    t.bar ~= 3; // works
    t.bar(); // works
    t.bar.opCall(); // works

    t.foo();
}

May seem trivial, but its actually pretty important for some friendly things im
working on.  Mixin operators can't be called from within the scope using the
mixin? Odd :) Thanks.
PS. You're my hero Walter.


--
Aug 03 2006
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=277






Also, operator selection doesnt happen with names.
for example:

template Foo()
{
 void opAddAssign(int x)
 {
 }
}

class Bar
{
 mixin Foo a;
 mixin Foo b;
}

Bar b;
bar.a += 2; // ambiguouity error
bar.a.opAddAssign(2); // works


--
Aug 13 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=277


bugzilla digitalmars.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |enhancement
           Priority|P2                          |P4





This is not a bug because operator overloading needs an object, and a mixin is
not an object. It's working as designed. I've changed this to an enhancement
request.


--
Aug 15 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeirosATgmail SPAM.com> writes:
d-bugmail puremagic.com wrote:

 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=277
 
            Summary: Named mixin operator resolution
            Product: D
            Version: 0.163
           Platform: PC
         OS/Version: Windows
             Status: NEW
           Severity: normal
           Priority: P2
          Component: DMD
         AssignedTo: bugzilla digitalmars.com
         ReportedBy: xergen hotmail.com
 
 
 template TestMixin(){
     void opCall()    {
     }
 
     void opCatAssign(uint val)    {
     }
 }
 
 class Test{
     mixin TestMixin bar;
 
     void foo(){
     //bar(); // doesn't work !?!?
     bar.opCall(); // works
     //bar ~= 3; // doesn't work
     bar.opCatAssign(3); // works
     }
 }
 
 void main(char[][] args){
     Test t = new Test();
     t.bar ~= 3; // works
     t.bar(); // works
     t.bar.opCall(); // works
 
     t.foo();
 }
 
 May seem trivial, but its actually pretty important for some friendly things im
 working on.  Mixin operators can't be called from within the scope using the
 mixin? Odd :) Thanks.
 PS. You're my hero Walter.
 
 


Not sure if it will be an useful workaround but using "this" works:
----
class Test{
   mixin TestMixin bar;

   void foo(){
     this.bar(); // works
     bar.opCall();
     this.bar ~= 3; // works
     bar.opCatAssign(3);
   }
}

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
Aug 16 2006
prev sibling parent reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=277






thanks for the workaround Bruno, though I'm afraid that would still be subject
to the problems with operator resolution in my comment :(  Works great if
you've only got one mixin however :)

As far as it being an enhancement, I can see your judgement there.  But I would
still think the second issue is a bug, as it's simply ignoring the mixin name,
which doesn't seem to make much sense to me.


--
Aug 16 2006
parent Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam com.gmail> writes:
d-bugmail puremagic.com wrote:

 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=277
 
 
 
 
 

 thanks for the workaround Bruno, though I'm afraid that would still be subject
 to the problems with operator resolution in my comment :(  Works great if
 you've only got one mixin however :)
 
 As far as it being an enhancement, I can see your judgement there.  But I would
 still think the second issue is a bug, as it's simply ignoring the mixin name,
 which doesn't seem to make much sense to me.
 
 


Dude, don't reply in the bugzilla to posts made (solely) in the NG. :P

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D
Aug 18 2006