Hello Nick,
"BCS" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
Hello Nick,
I *definitely* want that for string mixins of both the
template-generated and ctfe-generated varieties.
Why? I don't see any reason aside from documentation to do it.
Well, for one thing, not having it forces any code using my
custom-assert library to look like this crap...
mixin(deferAssert!(`foo == 3 || foo > 5`, "foo is bad"));
...which understandably no one wants to touch and I *absolutely* don't
blame them one bit. Compare that to this...
deferAssert!(`foo == 3 || foo > 5`, "foo is bad");
...ahhh, now I can actually see what the hell's going on!
1) I don't see a lot of difference (I see a /little/ difference), the extra
mixin() doesn't get in the way of /me/ seeing what going on.
2) I'd prefer more general solution, like being able to extract the original
string from a lazy parameter or pass expressions as alias:
void deferAssert!(alias exp, string message)
{
if(!exp) // deferAssert gets instanced as a local function (or gets
a hidden delegate parameter or wherever)
writef("%s failed: %s\n", exp.stringof, message);
}
3) anything that passes code around as strings looks like a hack (sometimes
necessary) to me and has so many downside relating to tools (particularly
syntax highlighters) that the mixin() gets lost in the noise.
void deferAssert!(foo == 3 || foo > 5, "foo is bad"); // ...ahhh, now I can
really see what the hell's going on, and so can my tools!
--
<IXOYE><
