On Thursday, 19 June 2014 at 21:27:17 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
I realized that it ought to be possible to allow a more direct drop-in replacement for std.random by adding static opCalls to the classes which were previously structs.

Thoughts on this, in favour, against ... ?

I'd say do it and make it @deprecated ... in general, I think allowing a "struct like constructor" for a class is bad style (at least for std, anyway) and should be discouraged, but deprecating it makes it an easy upgrade initially and will make it easier for people to compare the old vs new way with their code.
    • Re: hap.random: a ... Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
      • Re: hap.random... bearophile via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: hap.ra... Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re: ha... Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
            • R... Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-announce
            • R... Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
            • R... Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
        • Re: hap.ra... Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
          • Re: ha... bearophile via Digitalmars-d-announce
            • R... Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d-announce
  • Re: hap.random: a new r... Chris Cain via Digitalmars-d-announce

Reply via email to