On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 11:16:01 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
On 02/09/2018 05:31 AM, Kagamin wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 09:42:46 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
Huh? So are you *pro-* or *anti-* heredoc?
I personally prefer python's triple quoted strings. Elegant,
simple and enough for most stuff. That example only shows what
D has.
version(none)q{ FOO }; is likely to work for most stuff too.
/+ +/ is likely to work for most stuff, too.
So do /* */
It was only a minor problem for C89, because it had no line
comments and people didn't know about #if 0
I think version(none) has solidly proven that higher-level
semantic code-disabling, while sounds like a great idea on
paper, actually provides no practical, non-theoretical gains
other than the ability to nest, which /+ +/ shares (along with
the ability to be used in more scenarios and be less verbose).
I insert version(none) with just Ctrl+V which is faster and
easier than any stream comment that requires you to jump back and
forth to properly catch a bunch of raw characters. Also with it
you can switch alternative implementations like
version(all)
...
else
...
If the code is not deleted, it's useful; if it's useful, it will
be used; to be used it must be readable; to be readable it should
be highlighted; to highlighted it shouldn't be a comment.
/**
Be sure to check the various files at extras/foo*/package.d
and also: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/faq.html
*/
Unlike the "disabling code that contains the
end-of-disabled-code token" stuff, THIS example isn't quite so
trivial to deal with in a way that's reasonably readable from
both the generated docs and from within the code itself.
/**
Be sure to check the various files at extras/foo.../package.d
and also: https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/faq.html
*/
Ok, somebody might be unable to come up with this, but people
didn't know about #if 0 until told.
