• AJG (32/32) Aug 14 2005 Hi,
• Ben Hinkle (5/7) Aug 14 2005 something like
• AJG (5/10) Aug 14 2005 I don't get this part. How come the example in the docs doesn't do that?
• AJG (5/9) Aug 14 2005 Yes, this seems like a good idea.

AJG <AJG_member pathlink.com> writes:

Hi,

I'm using a variadic version of opIndexAssign, and it seems to work. I dunno if
this is a hack or not, but what the heck. In addition, I'm using std.boxer
internally. The problem is that I can't streamline the parameter-to-box
conversion. Here's an example:

















My question is, what do I put in __UNKNOWN__?

Plan B is to do a manual type-by-type test, like:






But this would really suck, as it ruins the whole thing. Surely there's a way to
automate that bit of nastiness so that I can do something like:



Right?

Thanks a ton for the help.
--AJG.

"Ben Hinkle" <ben.hinkle gmail.com> writes:

something like

 Box b = box(_arguments[0],_argptr);
 _argptr += (_arguments[0].tsize() + int.sizeof - 1) & ~(int.sizeof - 1);

Someone really should put that argptr increment in a standard place. It's 
come up twice recently... 

AJG <AJG_member pathlink.com> writes:

Hi,

something like

 Box b = box(_arguments[0],_argptr);

Nice! :)

 _argptr += (_arguments[0].tsize() + int.sizeof - 1) & ~(int.sizeof - 1);

I don't get this part. How come the example in the docs doesn't do that?

Someone really should put that argptr increment in a standard place. It's 
come up twice recently... 

Thanks!
--AJG.

AJG <AJG_member pathlink.com> writes:

 _argptr += (_arguments[0].tsize() + int.sizeof - 1) & ~(int.sizeof - 1);

I don't get this part. How come the example in the docs doesn't do that?

Oh, nevermind. I'm a doofus. It's because you didn't use the template macro to
get the arg. Right?

Someone really should put that argptr increment in a standard place. It's 
come up twice recently... 


Yes, this seems like a good idea.

Cheers,
--AJG.