Re: What's left to do for a stable D2?

[Simen kjaeraas]

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:12:47 +0100, grauzone <n...@example.net> wrote:

Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:

grauzone Wrote:

Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:

Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:

Eldar Insafutdinov wrote:

Jesse Phillips Wrote:

Jason House wrote:

Andrei's finishing his last TDPL chapter, Sean is updating std.thread(?), and Walter's been fixing forward reference and CTFE bugs. What's left?

This page[1] has been getting regular updates, so it should do a good

job answering the question.

1. http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel#FutureDirections

From this list: default struct constructors?

Walter doesn't want. This will go down as one of the larger language incapabilities.

Andrei

Sigh...

Why can't you just use opCall?

It's ugly, doesn't work sometimes and is inconsistent with other constructors.

Why doesn't it work, bugs?
Use opCall instead of constructor in the other cases too?

Are there cases where ctors can do something opCall can't? I thought constructors were only added for symmetry with dtors.

Take this for example:

struct S {
  int n;
  this( ) {
    n = random( );
  }
}

class C {
  S s;
}

In C++, 'new C( );' would call S's constructor, and initialize n to
some random number. opCall can do the same thing, but must be
explicitly called in C's constructor. This can be unacceptable for
libraries, at least.

--
Simen