On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 04:53:57PM +0000, Neia Neutuladh via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote: > On Mon, 24 Dec 2018 08:16:01 -0800, H. S. Teoh wrote: > > Rather, it's *conventionally* taken to mean "unused". The language > > actually does not treat it in any special way apart from "normal" > > identifiers. It's perfectly valid (though probably not > > recommended!) to declare functions or variables with the name "_" > > and use them. > > I once, in my callow days, wrote a unittest with variables named _, > __, ___, etc. It did not pass code review, but it did amuse.
GNU gettext used to (and perhaps still does?) use "_" as the name of the macro to do l10n string lookups. I suppose the idea was brevity for strings which are ubiquitously used, but still. T -- Тише едешь, дальше будешь.
