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

Reply via email to