On Thursday, 30 January 2020 at 16:16:48 UTC, MoonlightSentinel
wrote:
On Thursday, 30 January 2020 at 15:14:43 UTC, ShadoLight wrote:
[...]
From my POV is
void foo(T)() { ... }
just a shorthand notation for...
Agreed. My question though is should the 'shorthand' notation
_replace_ the 'longhand' notation, or be available _in addition_
to the 'longhand' notation in the eponymous case (so the
eponymous notation is just 'syntax sugar' if you will).
If you had...
template foo(T) {
bar(){..}
}
...you have no choice but to use foo!(int).bar()- (where T is
'int'). So, I'm asking, in the eponymous case, should...
template foo(T) {
foo(){..}
}
force you to use foo!(int)() instead (as is currently the case),
or should foo!(int).foo() also still be acceptable/available?
For consistency's sake I think it should be but, if there is some
reason why this is not technically possible/advisable, I was
hoping someone would enlighten me.
And, in that case some of the examples in the documentation needs
fixing.
