digitalmars.D.learn - Why can't I have overloading and generics?
- Caligo (21/21) Mar 09 2012 struct B { }
- sclytrack (32/53) Mar 10 2012 I don't know what the best solution is. But the following works.
- David (4/5) Mar 10 2012 down to:
- so (8/32) Mar 10 2012 When it comes to templates if it works in C++ and not in D, you
- Jesse Phillips (2/2) Mar 10 2012 Templates not overriding non-template functions is a bug
struct B { }
struct C { }
struct D { }
struct A {
ref A foo(B item) {
/* do something special. */
return this;
}
ref A foo(T)(T item) if(is(T == C) || is(T == D)) {
/* nothing special, do the same for C and D. */
return this;
}
}
Is this unreasonable? iirc, C++ supports this, but not D. What's the
reason? Bug?
What's a good solution to this?
1. a generic `foo()` that uses `static if`s?
2. overload `foo()`, even if it means having function bodies that are
exactly same (code duplication).?
3. mixin templates? I don't know about this because TDPL says it's
experimental, and I've tried and I get weird errors.
Mar 09 2012
On 03/10/2012 04:32 AM, Caligo wrote:
struct B { }
struct C { }
struct D { }
struct A {
ref A foo(B item) {
/* do something special. */
return this;
}
ref A foo(T)(T item) if(is(T == C) || is(T == D)) {
/* nothing special, do the same for C and D. */
return this;
}
}
Is this unreasonable? iirc, C++ supports this, but not D. What's the
reason? Bug?
What's a good solution to this?
1. a generic `foo()` that uses `static if`s?
2. overload `foo()`, even if it means having function bodies that are
exactly same (code duplication).?
3. mixin templates? I don't know about this because TDPL says it's
experimental, and I've tried and I get weird errors.
I don't know what the best solution is. But the following works.
import std.stdio;
struct B { }
struct C { }
struct D { }
struct A {
ref A foo(T)(T item) if (is(T==B)) {
/* do something special. */
writeln("B");
return this;
}
ref A foo(T)(T item) if(is(T == C) || is(T == D)) {
/* nothing special, do the same for C and D. */
writeln("C or D");
return this;
}
}
int main()
{
A a;
B b;
C c;
a.foo(b);
a.foo(c);
writeln("Test");
return 0;
}
-----------------------output
B
C or D
Test
Mar 10 2012
You can strip
ref A foo(T)(T item) if (is(T==B)) {
down to:
ref A foo(T : B)(T item) // or to match your example
ref A foo(T == B)(T item)
Mar 10 2012
On Saturday, 10 March 2012 at 03:32:44 UTC, Caligo wrote:
struct B { }
struct C { }
struct D { }
struct A {
ref A foo(B item) {
/* do something special. */
return this;
}
ref A foo(T)(T item) if(is(T == C) || is(T == D)) {
/* nothing special, do the same for C and D. */
return this;
}
}
Is this unreasonable? iirc, C++ supports this, but not D.
What's the
reason? Bug?
What's a good solution to this?
1. a generic `foo()` that uses `static if`s?
2. overload `foo()`, even if it means having function bodies
that are
exactly same (code duplication).?
3. mixin templates? I don't know about this because TDPL says
it's
experimental, and I've tried and I get weird errors.
When it comes to templates if it works in C++ and not in D, you
can be sure it is a bug OR future!
For this one i am sure it is a bug. Rule is, when language
resolves the function it first looks for exact matches then
template overloads and i can't see anything wrong in your code. I
am not sure but it is probably about "is". Its usage looks pretty
in your code, it should not! :)
Mar 10 2012
Templates not overriding non-template functions is a bug http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1528
Mar 10 2012









David <d dav1d.de> 