Philippe Sigaud wrote:
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 01:11, Gareth Charnock <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Couldn't agree more because I'm sure I'll miss tricks and
conventions. I would have never thought of that funky swizzling idea.
Here is a first try with the new operator syntax:
http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/2010-April/074864.html
Maybe it can help you...
Yeah, opDispatch is really cool. :) Here's an even earlier suggestion
by Don, using inline assembler:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/Re_dynamic_classes_and_duck_typing_102407.html#N102410
(Note: "opDynamic" was an early proposal. It should be replaced with
"opDispatch", which is what we have now.)
-Lars