On 04/13/2013 05:25 PM, qznc wrote:
Sat, 13 Apr 2013 15:03:51 +0200: Vladimir Panteleev wrote
On Saturday, 13 April 2013 at 12:29:29 UTC, qznc wrote:
While there is no syntactic sugar,
What about lambdas?
http://dlang.org/expression.html#Lambda
Oh. I forgot about those. Thanks!
The syntactic sugar seems to be quite diverse, since most of the
FunctionLiteral is optional. As far as I understand the docs, all the
following forms are valid?
auto square1 = function int (int x) { return x*x; };
yes.
auto square2 = function (int x) { return x*x; };
yes.
auto square3 = (int x) { return x*x; };
yes.
auto square4 = int (int x) { return x*x; };
no.
auto square5 = (int x) => x*x;
yes.
auto square6 = x => x*x;
no. (valid grammar, but you need some type annotation.)
But there are more, like function(int x)=>x*x.
