On Saturday, 28 November 2015 at 06:26:03 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
On Friday, 27 November 2015 at 20:25:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
That syntax is the same as constructors... if that's what you
want it to look like, we ought to actually use a constructor
for all but the zero-argument ones which I'd use a static
named function for (perhaps .make or perhaps .makeEmpty too)
While I think this would be nice and explicit, it's bad for
generic code, which would have to specialize to correctly call
the nullary version.
Well... doesn't work: http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/2c69cc3584b8
