Am waiting for an answer to the question about a mutable version before adding doc.
Cheers Lex On Saturday, January 3, 2015 12:18:58 AM UTC+10, Tim Holy wrote: > > Adding documentation is a great way for users to contribute! See the > CONTRIBUTING.md file if you're new to this. > > --Tim > > On Friday, January 02, 2015 04:56:05 AM [email protected] > <javascript:> wrote: > > And more generally, sections for C++ and java in Noteworthy Differences > > <http://julia.readthedocs.org/en/latest/manual/noteworthy-differences/> > > would be useful. Except, I'm thinking of not only syntactic differences, > > but rather how very common features or idioms in C++ are done in Julia. > A > > colleague asked if Julia supports objects. I said; yes, well not really, > > but you do it like this. A section like that could quickly show whether > you > > can do what you want with Julia. > > > > On Thursday, January 1, 2015 2:23:39 AM UTC+1, Josh Langsfeld wrote: > > > I currently am trying to solve a problem where I have many composite > types > > > and I would like to associate some data with each type, such that > every > > > instance has access to it. Obviously, in C++ I would just create a > static > > > member variable. > > > > > > Is there a good way to go about this in Julia? Currently, I have it > > > working by using a global Dict mapping DataType objects to their > > > associated > > > data but I really don't like this. Something more naive like just > adding > > > that field to every object instance also strikes me as unnecessary and > > > wasteful. I haven't seen any significant discussion about static > fields on > > > the lists or on github so is this something that could be considered > for > > > addition to the language? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Josh > >
