Walter Bright, el 29 de noviembre a las 13:52 me escribiste: > Leandro Lucarella wrote: > >Walter Bright, el 27 de noviembre a las 15:30 me escribiste: > >>One thing Java and Python, Ruby, etc., still hold over D is dynamic > >>classes, i.e. classes that are only known at runtime, not compile > >>time. In D, this: > > > >I like the feature, but I don't understand where is the duck-typing in all > >this. I think you're confusing duck-typing with dynamic-typing or I'm > >missing something? > > Perhaps I am using the term wrong, but I figure it's duck-typing if > you can go ahead and try to access methods of an object, and they > are checked at runtime and throw some kind of method-not-found > exception if they aren't there.
OK, now I see what you mean. Perhaps it would be helpful to have a standard exception for unexistent methods to support that idiom. If we don't every library will create one and it would be a mess. A standard way to test if a method exists would be nice too, something like Python's getattr(), setattr() and hasattr() can be a start. -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Demasiado lento para una estrella fugaz Demasiado limpio para lo que vos acostumbras Demasiado claro para tanta oscuridad Demasiados sueños, poca realidad
