On Thu, 08 Jan 2015 21:22:30 +0000
ponce via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com>
wrote:

> On Thursday, 8 January 2015 at 20:23:11 UTC, ketmar via 
> Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> > i'm not sure, but maybe it worth renaming "struct inheritance" 
> > to
> > "extending a struct"? or even something completely different. 
> > what it
> > does is actually extending/augmenting the struct, but not
> > OO-inheritance, as one cannot pass "augmented" struct to the 
> > function
> > which expects original struct. at least without hackery.
> 
> Renamed, thanks!
we actually can pass "extended" struct as original one, as Artur shown,
but i believe that "extending" is still better.

p.s. you forgot to fix TOC, which still reads "struct inheritance".

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to