On Monday, 3 March 2014 at 17:24:08 UTC, Dominikus Dittes Scherkl
wrote:
On Monday, 3 March 2014 at 16:40:09 UTC, Chris wrote:
I'm always willing to use templates, but maybe in fact the use
cases are limited. I have a class for html elements (that
implements DOM functionality), and a class for building trees
with the tags. Of course, for html tags only string as a type
makes sense.
Really?
Did you consider that there are three different flavors of
"string"?
Does your function really only deal with string?
Or would someone need wstring or dstring?
Good point. Of course! I was thinking in an abstract way of
"string".
class HTMLElement(T) if (is (T == string))
}
[...] I don't know [...] if I won't have to modify the
template to adapt to new data types (which kinda defeats the
purpose).
Not much if the different types have common features.
Most times it is still a big save of code to implement, even
if the types need to be handled different in some places.
But it's no longer a template then, is it?
