Jay Norwood:
If that is so, then the C initialization of an array with an
unnamed struct type, like this, would require a struct type
name.
static struct { int i; long lv;} suits[3] = {{1, 2L},{2,
4L},{3,9L}};
Giving a struct a name is often a good idea. But if you don't
want to name it, then you can use a Phobos Tuple. You can even
omit its field names if you want.
struct Suit {string nm; int val; int val2; string shortNm;};
Better:
static struct Suit {string nm; int val; int val2; string
shortNm;}
Generally inside functions it's better to define static struct.
And struct definitions don't need a trailing semicolon.
foreach (member; suits)
Generally it's better to attach an 'immutable' there, this is not
always possible, but it's a good habit:
foreach (immutable member; suits)
I also tried using writefln(tup) and writeln(tup) in the
example above. The output from writeln(tup) looks like it is
headed in the right direction. Maybe a writecsv(tup) would be
useful.
Try:
member.writeln;
Bye,
bearophile
