On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:48:28 -0500, Don <[email protected]> wrote:
Now that we have struct literals, the old C-style struct initializers
don't seem to be necessary.
The variations with named initializers are not really implemented -- the
example in the spec doesn't work, and most uses of them cause compiler
segfaults or wrong code generation. EG...
struct Move{
int D;
}
enum Move genMove = { D:4 };
immutable Move b = genMove;
It's not difficult to fix these compiler problems, but I'm just not sure
if it's worth implementing. Maybe they should just be dropped? (The {
field: value } style anyway).
Brought up in another thread, a good use of static initializers for
structs: arrays of POD literals.
For example:
struct RGB
{
ubyte red, green, blue;
}
RGB[256] PALETTE = [
{0x00, 0x00, 0x00},
{0x01, 0x01, 0x01},
...
];
can you do something like this without static initializers? My
recollection is that this is the only way to have a struct array literal.
-Steve
