Le 2011-01-03 à 9:02, Steve Schveighoffer a écrit :
> I understand this, but it's rarely needed. What would the string represent
> if
> not a path? My point was that, the most intuitive interface is to take a
> string. This looks very intuitive to me:
>
> auto f = openFile("/my/filename");
I think one reason is that sometime you have a constructor that takes either a
path or a string. For instance, I could have a class TextContent that can be
initialized wither with a path to a text file, or a string for the content. To
implement this I need Path to be of a different type, or I need to introduce a
dummy parameter. And it's not like I can give a different name to one of those
constructors, all constructors have the same name in D.
There was a discussion about this on d.learn recently, so it's not like it's a
made up case. (See "discrimination of constructors with same number of
parameters", December 30.)
That said, I agree that generally using a path struct everywhere would be too
verbose.
--
Michel Fortin
[email protected]
http://michelf.com/
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
