www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.learn - Static function at module level

reply "Phil Lavoie" <maidenphil hotmail.com> writes:
Ok, so after years of D usage I just noticed that this is valid D 
(compiles anyways):

static void myFunc() {}

What is a static function at module level exactly? In C, that 
means private, in D, that means ___________?

Thanks,
Phil
Aug 17 2014
next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn writes:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 01:32:40 +0000
Phil Lavoie via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com>
wrote:


 Ok, so after years of D usage I just noticed that this is valid D
 (compiles anyways):

 static void myFunc() {}

 What is a static function at module level exactly? In C, that
 means private, in D, that means ___________?


I'm pretty sure that it means nothing. It's just one of those cases where an
attribute is ignored, because it doesn't apply rather than resulting in an
error.

- Jonathan M Davis
Aug 17 2014
parent "Phil Lavoie" <maidenphil hotmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 05:29:53 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via 
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:

 On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 01:32:40 +0000
 Phil Lavoie via Digitalmars-d-learn 
 <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com>
 wrote:


 Ok, so after years of D usage I just noticed that this is 
 valid D
 (compiles anyways):

 static void myFunc() {}

 What is a static function at module level exactly? In C, that
 means private, in D, that means ___________?


 I'm pretty sure that it means nothing. It's just one of those 
 cases where an
 attribute is ignored, because it doesn't apply rather than 
 resulting in an
 error.

 - Jonathan M Davis


All right thanks!
Aug 18 2014
prev sibling parent reply ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com> writes:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 01:32:40 +0000
Phil Lavoie via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com>
wrote:


 What is a static function at module level exactly? In C, that=20
 means private, in D, that means ___________?


nothing. static attribute for free function has no special meaning. but
other function declarations (methods, nested functions) accepts
'static', so why free functions shouldn't?
Aug 17 2014
parent reply "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
ketmar:


 other function declarations (methods, nested functions) accepts
 'static', so why free functions shouldn't?


For various reasons, one of them is that accepting useless code 
confuses newbies and doesn't allow them to build a correct model 
of the D semantics in their head.

Bye,
bearophile
Aug 17 2014
next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn" <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com> writes:
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 06:46:02AM +0000, bearophile via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:

 ketmar:
 

other function declarations (methods, nested functions) accepts
'static', so why free functions shouldn't?


 
 For various reasons, one of them is that accepting useless code
 confuses newbies and doesn't allow them to build a correct model of
 the D semantics in their head.


[...]

Is there a bug filed for this?


T

-- 
Век живи - век учись. А дураком помрёшь.
Aug 18 2014
parent reply "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
H. S. Teoh:


 Is there a bug filed for this?


Probably there is. But I stopped filing similar bugs because they 
seem to have a very low priority.

Bye,
bearophile
Aug 18 2014
parent "Phil Lavoie" <maidenphil hotmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 14:23:47 UTC, bearophile wrote:

 H. S. Teoh:


 Is there a bug filed for this?


 Probably there is. But I stopped filing similar bugs because 
 they seem to have a very low priority.

 Bye,
 bearophile


I looked around for it but didn't find it. I filed this one: 
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13322

As you'll see, every type of module level declaration accepts 
static.
static int x;
static void myFunc(){}
static interface MyInterface{}
static class MyClass{}
static struct MyStruct{}
static template myTemplate{}

And maybe I am missing some.
Aug 18 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent "Phil Lavoie" <maidenphil hotmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 06:46:03 UTC, bearophile wrote:

 ketmar:


 other function declarations (methods, nested functions) accepts
 'static', so why free functions shouldn't?


 For various reasons, one of them is that accepting useless code 
 confuses newbies and doesn't allow them to build a correct 
 model of the D semantics in their head.

 Bye,
 bearophile


Agreed. I was misled for a minute. I don't think it should 
compile.
Aug 18 2014
prev sibling parent reply ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com> writes:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 06:46:02 +0000
bearophile via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com>
wrote:


 accepting useless code confuses newbies


i think that i'm not really a newbie now ;-), but i'm still used to
declare various private module functions and variables as 'static'.
yes, sometimes this confuses me (as to "do i need to make this sta...
ah, scrap that, it's D!"), but sometimes this is handy. why? i'm still
have to use C sometimes, and i'm writing 'static' automatically. having
compiler to accept it for anything high-level saves me one regexp
search-and-replace. ;-)
Aug 18 2014
parent reply "Phil Lavoie" <maidenphil hotmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 18 August 2014 at 17:42:37 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:

 On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 06:46:02 +0000
 bearophile via Digitalmars-d-learn 
 <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com>
 wrote:


 accepting useless code confuses newbies


 i think that i'm not really a newbie now ;-), but i'm still 
 used to
 declare various private module functions and variables as 
 'static'.
 yes, sometimes this confuses me (as to "do i need to make this 
 sta...
 ah, scrap that, it's D!"), but sometimes this is handy. why? 
 i'm still
 have to use C sometimes, and i'm writing 'static' 
 automatically. having
 compiler to accept it for anything high-level saves me one 
 regexp
 search-and-replace. ;-)


I don't think he meant you personally. Well, I hope not. I was 
confused by it too and I don't consider myself a D newbie.

I get that it is convenient for you. I have done a lot of C 
myself. However, convenience loses to misleading in my book.

Consider that in the future, for example, "static interface 
Toto{}" means something different than "interface Toto{}". I am 
not debating whether or not that would ever happen or what would 
even be the meaning of a static interface (even though I have an 
idea), the point is more like this: every compiler version will 
accept both versions of said interface, but some of those 
compiler will interpret it differently. Now that's a problem.

Philz
Aug 18 2014
parent ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com> writes:
On Mon, 18 Aug 2014 17:55:01 +0000
Phil Lavoie via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn puremagic.com>
wrote:


 I don't think he meant you personally.


ah, nothing personal, i just described my use case, maybe using some
vague wording. i AM a newbie in D, there is nothing insulting in being
newbie. ;-)


 the point is more like this: every compiler version will=20
 accept both versions of said interface, but some of those=20
 compiler will interpret it differently. Now that's a problem.


hm. to be honest, i just don't want to fix almost all my code removing
spurious 'static's here and there. ;-)
Aug 18 2014