On Sunday, 31 July 2016 at 14:38:33 UTC, Lodovico Giaretta wrote:
On Sunday, 31 July 2016 at 13:39:58 UTC, Enamex wrote:
I suggest extending the existing `S s = {field: value}` syntax
to allow specifying the type itself next to the field list and
make it usable generally everywhere.
So, instead:
takeThing(Thing{ field: val, num: 43 });
It shouldn't clash with anything else, I think.
I support this idea of extending curly-brace initializers. It
would be very useful and less ambiguous than parenthesized
initializers.
[A thread about this]
http://forum.dlang.org/post/ni0u47$2100$1...@digitalmars.com
[An issue about this]
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15692
It's strange that D wouldn't support something like that as even
C (C99) can do it with compound literals (struct s){ .z = "Pi",
.x = 3, .y = 3.1415 }. It's absolutely possible to pass it to a
function taking a struct s. You can even take its address with &
if the fonction take a pointer to a struct. I use it all the time
on my work project.
