This is turning out to be rather tricky. The following produces a compile
error:
class C
{
string toString() { return ""; }
string toString() shared { return ""; }
}
void main()
{
auto c = new shared(C);
c.toString();
}
abc.d(4): Error: function abc.C.toString of type shared string() overrides but
is not covariant with object.Object.toString of type string()
If I replace "shared" with "const" however, this works just fine. I guess for
now, the only solution is for Tuple to not attempt to call toString for shared
objects, and I suppose have writeln() return a more meaningful compile-time
error for shared objects. The only alternative I can think of is to define a
toStringShared() routine, which doesn't seem at all ideal.
On Sep 30, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Sean Kelly wrote:
> I've been thinking about this and realized that shared shouldn't be applied
> to any of the methods in Object--only const. That I ran into this at all was
> the result of a contrivance rather than a realistic scenario. I think Variant
> will need a fix to handle the toString issue, but that's all.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 30, 2010, at 3:50 PM, Sean Kelly <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Here's the test case:
>>
>> auto e = new shared(Exception)("hi");
>> writeln(e);
>>
>> and the error:
>>
>> std/format.d(1293): Error: function object.Throwable.toString () is not
>> callable using argument types ()
>>
>> I'm guessing this is because toString() isn't a shared method.
>> Interestingly, also means that it isn't possible to put a shared class into
>> a Variant, since it provides a toString method. So I guess it's becoming
>> pretty important to sort out the qualifiers for Object methods. I'd
>> considered providing both a shared and unshared toString (and others), but
>> then child classes defining only one get compile errors about hiding the
>> method in question. It doesn't seem reasonable to expect people to supply
>> both, and I don't believe inout works for the hidden "this" parameter, so...
>> ideas? I don't know that we can provide only a shared version of these
>> methods because they may reference non-shared static data so I'm at a bit of
>> a loss for what to do.
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
