Adam Burton wrote:
Jason House wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Please do not accuse me of such a thing simply because I haven't
changed my opinion. You've held your ground as well, so I could just as
easily accuse you of being closed-minded and merely reaffirming a your
preconceived opinion. I have indeed listened to the arguments and
responded to them.
Given my track record, I think it should come at no surprise that I'm
not a fan of dynamic typing.
Andrei
I'm no fan of it either. I will be pissed if one day I'm using a D library
and a function name typo becomes a runtime error. There is no program too
short for me to introduce typos and bugs.
Even still, this dynamic stuff does not bother me much because it only
gets turned on if the class designer wanted it. I assume that it'd be a
corner of the language I could avoid. The use seems reasonable besides
sone bicycle shed coloring, so I plan to sit quietly in the corner and
await an outcome.
My only 2 cents is to use something other than dot for dynamic function
invocation. Given how much I plan to use it, it's probably better for me
to abstain.
I agree.
Bare with me on this as I am making some assumptions, I don't follow D2
development very closely ... or D as much as I would like these days :-(.
What about using something like '->' for dynamic calls instead of '.'?
That's absolutely useless. If I have to write anything different from
"." I might as well write "bloodyMaryBloodyMaryBloodyMary".
Andrei
