On Monday, 23 December 2013 at 01:39:26 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP54
This is follow-up of several hot discussion threads that have
happened several months ago. It has become pretty clear that
there is no good way out of existing situation and least bad
needs to be picked just to move forward (because it still be
better than current horrible one)
Linked proposal was discussed in short e-mail conversation with
Andrei (with silent observation with Walter) and is mostly
pre-approved. I am interested in general opinion of community
and suggestions for any smaller tweaks before starting to work
on pull requests.
Thanks for your attention.
Small update on this.
I have chosen to go route of investigating compiler enhancement
possibilities first to allow cleaner argument pack
implementation. After some tweaks it was relatively easy to make
work these two samples:
-----
struct X
{
static int opSlice(size_t l, size_t u) { return l + u; }
}
pragma(msg, X[1..2]);
-----
and
-----
struct X
{
// note the template args
static auto opSlice(size_t l, size_t u)() { return l + u; }
}
pragma(msg, X[1..2]);
-----
However I am still struggling with more practical example:
-----
struct X(T...)
{
static auto opSlice(size_t l, size_t u)() { return
X!(T[l..u]); }
}
alias Y = (X!(1, 2, 3))[1..2];
-----
It seems to take completely different processing path, one that
does not allow obvious syntax rewriting before semantic pass. I
think I'll throw few more weeks into trying this and proceed with
crappy alternative upon failure.
