--- Comment #4 from Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> 2011-11-30 03:02:18 PST ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > (In reply to comment #0)
> > > These expressions are ambiguous:
> > > ---
> > > a.max(n);
> > > a[1..4].max(n);
> > > ---
> > > Does it mean calling the function on the slice or on each item in the
> > > slice?
> > It means calling the function on the slice. Unless I'm mistaken, there
> > isn't
> > any D syntax at the moment that means calling the function on each element
> > of
> > the array.
> That's correct.
> > > Possible solution is to change the meaning of empty square brackets from
> > > full
> > > slice to only a hint for array operation so that a.max(n) is an array
> > > operation and a[1..4].max(n) is max(a[1..4],n).
> > This would get confusing. You might want to apply a function to the whole
> > slice [1..4] or to each element of the slice. This applies whether the
> > array-property sugar is being used or not.
> > Perhaps the best solution is to define  applied to the function identifier
> > itself to do an elementwise application.
> > So max(a, n) or a.max(n) would just call max(a, n) once.
> > And max(a, n) or a.max(n) would evaluate to an array of max(a[i], n).
> > And the same if a is replaced with a, a[1..4] or some such in each case.
> That looks to me as if max is an array of some struct S which defines an
> > Of course, ambiguities can still occur in functions with multiple array
> > parameters. Presumably the language would forbid it in these ambiguous
> > cases,
> > as it does already with ambiguous overload matching.
> Consider the case where we want y to be
> [ max(x[0..$], max(x[0..$], ... ]
> double  x;
> double  y;
> Brainstorming a few possibilities:
> y = max(x[2..12]); // (1) looks like scalar assignment
> y = max[2..12](x); // (2)
> y = max(x[2..12]); // (3)
That's ambiguous - maybe max is a function that returns an array or other type
with an opSlice().
> Can we put the  _before_ the call? y =  max(x);
> y = x.max;
Would (expr) be the empty array's opCall(expr) or the vectorisation of the
function referenced by expr? And .func be a vectorisation of the global
function func or the empty array's .func method? (Are you envisaging that 
vectorises a whole subexpression or just the function whose name it immediately
FWIW the other week I discovered C++11 variadic templates. I wonder if we can
draw inspiration from the unpacking syntax here....
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------