On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 16:41:58 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/27/10 13:28 PDT, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
No, the code does this:
f.writeln("hello");
f.writeln("world");
The example is supposed to demonstrate how to re-open the file for
appending and write "world". Look at some of the other examples. Not
that it's a big deal, because I think it's just one more line.
Oh, I understand now. Thanks.
BTW, Don pointed out the clarifcation that I missed. It actually is
correct, my apologies.
I bring it up because people look at the C++ or C version and say "how
ugly, look how nice D looks," but the C++ version doesn't incur extra
allocations AFAIK. It's like commenting on how beautiful function qsort
looks. In reality, it's not as bad, because it's just that the
functionality isn't there yet. If it were, it would still look as
beautiful :) I just hate it when people compares an apple to orange and
comment on how the orange looks like a much better apple.
I agree. In fairness, the same goes about comparing incorrect code with
correct code. My understanding is that quite a few examples given in
that thread are not correct, in spite of looking quite elaborate.
FWIW it's not much aggravation to avoid unnecessary allocations:
char[] line;
f.readln(line);
f.readln(line);
Hm.. this still allocates. We can do better than the C++ example:
char[128] buf;
char[] line = buf[];
f.readln(line);
f.readln(line);
Which should not allocate at all in this case, and is completely safe if
it *does* have to allocate (like if some malicious code came along and
rewrote the file to have a 500-character first line). Try to do *that*
with std::string :)
Man D is just so cool!
-Steve
