Re: Pushing D's mixin to the limits: Project Euler Problem 61 from Ruby to D by David Oftedal

[Rounin via Digitalmars-d-announce]

Hey there!

Yeah, to expect people to register on LiveJournal in this age of 
Facebook... Sorry about that; It must have been to deter the 
spammers.

Thanks for taking the time to comment! Your solution with the 
single call to mixin() is much more elegant. I made a version 2 
which uses it.

The reason I used a double mixin() was that the first thing I 
tried was mixin("foreach() etc. etc."), which I think may have 
failed due to the foreach, then mixin("defineMain();"); , which 
was interpreted as a function declaration, and then I went 
straight for the mixin("mixin()"); . If it ain't broke, et cetera.

I still think the double mixin() can compete in terms of comedy 
value, though, don't you think?

Also, thanks for pointing out UFCS. It seems like a very 
convenient, not to mention SANE alternative to monkey patching, 
and it'll make it even more seamless to port code that makes use 
of that mechanism.