On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 10:25:18 -0400, Jacob Carlborg <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2011-08-29 16:10, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"Jacob Carlborg"<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
I just got and idea, what about allowing to overload methods based on
if
they're static or not.
From my list of 'Andrei' bugs:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3345
It sounds like a good idea, but what are the real use cases and what
are the
corner cases?
In my serialization library, Orange, I want to have a "reset" method
that is both static and non-static. The static method would reset some
static variables while the non-static method would reset the instance
variables.
Another use case is to have a static and non-static opDispatch at the
same time. I've been playing around with the idea of having something
similar to Ruby on Rails' activerecord implemented in D. In activerecord
you can do something like this:
p = Person.find_by_name("Joe")
name = p.name
Both "find_by_name" and "name" are implemented using "method_missing"
(Ruby's opDispatch). In D, this would require both a static and a
non-static opDispatch.
opDispatch is a much more convincing use case than just some random
function name.
But one function name can be solved. i.e. opStaticDispatch.
I had a similar issue with D a long long time ago, but I since fixed the
problem by just renaming one of the functions.
My opinion is that static methods should *not* be callable from an
instance, you should need typeof(instance).staticMethod. The current
allowance is misleading.
This should solve some of the issues, but of course, you'd need to allow
overloading of the method name in static and non-static forms.
-Steve
