On Wednesday, 15 April 2015 at 19:09:42 UTC, Márcio Martins wrote:
Hi!
I use Appender a lot, and find it ugly to write this all the
time to efficiently construct strings:
app.put("foo");
app.put(var);
app.put("bar");
Sidetracking a bit, but when I started using Appender I was
surprised to see that put didn't return a reference to the
Appender itself. Had it done so, you could have chained your put
calls very nicely.
app.put("foo")
.put(var)
.put("bar")
.put(more)
.put("stuff");
You can naturally write a small wrapper function that does this
for you, but it still strikes me as odd. Sadly I imagine changing
the return type would make the function signature mangle
differently, breaking ABI compatibility.
