• mandel (7/7) Dec 02 2007 Hi,
• bearophile (5/8) Dec 02 2007 I may agree, usually.
• mandel (18/19) Dec 02 2007 Local namespaces have their purpose as
• Jarrett Billingsley (25/32) Dec 02 2007 Inside another class, static classes are classes without outer pointers.
• mandel (4/8) Dec 02 2007 Ok, that's behaviour I expected.

mandel <oh no.es> writes:

Hi,

I like to ask of the meaning of
static class Foo {}
I thought I could use it like the C++ namespace keyword.
But static doesn't seem to have an effect.
Things that do not have an effect should result in compiler
warnings or even errors.

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

mandel:
 I thought I could use it like the C++ namespace keyword.

D has modules and packages as Python, use them.


 Things that do not have an effect should result in compiler
 warnings or even errors.

I may agree, usually.

Bye,
bearophile

mandel <oh no.es> writes:

bearophile wrote:

 D has modules and packages as Python, use them.

Local namespaces have their purpose as
nested classes and functions do have.
Having files/modules for them is a blunt instrument.

I thought of

static class Foo
{
  uint a;
  uint b;
}

as a shortcut for smth. similar to

class Foo
{
  static uint a;
  static uint b;
}

But with the difference that a "static class" wouldn't allow to be 
instanciated (singleton out fo the box).

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"mandel" <oh no.es> wrote in message news:fiumjg$2uol$2 digitalmars.com...
 Hi,

 I like to ask of the meaning of
 static class Foo {}
 I thought I could use it like the C++ namespace keyword.
 But static doesn't seem to have an effect.
 Things that do not have an effect should result in compiler
 warnings or even errors.

Inside another class, static classes are classes without outer pointers.

class A
{
    int x;

    class B
    {
        void foo()
        {
            writefln(x); // works fine, accesses this.outer.x
        }
    }

    static class C
    {
        void bar()
        {
            writefln(x); // error, 'this' for 'x' needs to be of type 'A', 
not 'C'
        }
    }
}

Outside, static does nothing.

It's annoying that redundant attributes/protection specifiers are allowed by 
the compiler, but it supposedly makes generic code easier, mostly when 
dealing with mixins. 

mandel <oh no.es> writes:

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
 
 Inside another class, static classes are classes without outer pointers.

Ok, that's behaviour I expected.
But not quite as I hoped regarding to the outside declaration.

[..]
 
 Outside, static does nothing.