On Thursday, 13 August 2015 at 19:13:55 UTC, D_Learner wrote:
I was wondering how I could change the code below such the `bmBc` is computed at compile time . The one below works for runtime but it is not ideal since I need to know the `bmBc` table at compile-time . I could appreciate advice on how I could improve on this.



    import std.conv:to;
    import std.stdio;

    int [string]  bmBc;
    immutable string pattern = "GCAGAGAG";
    const int size = to!int(pattern.length);

     struct king {

            void  calculatebmBc(int i)()
            {
                    static if ( i < size -1 )
bmBc[to!string(pattern[i])]=to!int(size-i-1);

                  //        bmBc[pattern[i]] ~= i-1;

                    calculatebmBc!(i+1)();
            }
            void calculatebmBc(int i: size-1)() {

            }
    }

    void main(){
      king myKing;

      const  int start = 0;
      myKing.calculatebmBc!(start)();
     //1.   enum  bmBcTable =  bmBc;

    }

I think you may have some fundamental misunderstandings regarding CTFE, templates, etc. Your code seems to be half-way between a template-based and a CTFE-based solution.

The simple way to do compile-time computation in D is CTFE (Compile Time Function Evaluation). That is, you write a pure function that can be evaluated both at run-time and at compile-time. CTFE doesn't need template parameters.

Here's some code that should do the same as yours and is compatible with CTFE:

----
import std.conv: to;
import std.stdio;

int[char] calculatebmBc(string pattern) pure
{
    const int size = to!int(pattern.length);
    int[char] result;

    foreach(i; 0 .. size - 1)
    {
        result[pattern[i]] = to!int(size - i - 1);
    }

    return result;
}

void main()
{
    auto bmBc = calculatebmBc("GCAGAGAG");
    enum bmBcTable = calculatebmBc("GCAGAGAG");
}
----

The key is that calculatebmBc is pure, i.e. it doesn't read or write any module-level mutables.

I touched some things here and here I didn't like that are not related to purity/CTFE.

Adam D. Ruppe already mentioned an issue with associative arrays: This doesn't work:
----
static foo = calculatebmBc("GCAGAGAG");
----
It's annoying, but if you need that you have to use some other data structure. See Adam's post.

Reply via email to