First of all thanks for your replies, they are useful.
@Philippe:
A pure function is ok for initializing default_nodes but not
for nodes because a pure function can't read a file.
The static this has the problem it needs know the initializer
at compile time but I wanted to choose the
Indeed the ref can be applied to the return type:
http://dlang.org/function.html#ref-functions
So, does the following code copy any data from nodes?
If that is the case this solution avoids the class storage,
avoids pointers and nodes is encapsulated as read-only, that's
great.
The program I'm
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 18:21:06 UTC, Vicente wrote:
@Wyatt:
Certainly ref parameters help a lot, but I'm trying to get a
Node by returning (a reference to) it. Does the ref keyword
apply to the return type?
I poked it a bit and came out with this. I _think_ it's working
as expected:
On Friday, 22 August 2014 at 20:12:39 UTC, Wyatt wrote:
I poked it a bit and came out with this. I _think_ it's
working as expected:
...
auto ref opSlice(){return nodes[];};
...
-Wyatt
Assuming it's working as expected, that is exactly what I was
looking for!
But the following
If the foreach loop is replaced by:
foreach(ref node_ref; np)
Then it works like a charm!
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 21:26:55 UTC, Philippe Sigaud via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
If you want reference semantics but do not want to have pointers
in your code, yes classes are your best choice.
Alternatively, isn't this a good place to use ref parameters? Or
is there some semantic I'm
On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 11:49 PM, Jakob Ovrum via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com wrote:
Certainly the easiest, but I don't think it's always the best. If
light-weightedness is desired, make the struct contain the reference,
effectively making the struct a reference type
Well, yes.
Hello,
I have some questions on how to do a few things in D.
Below is an example code on which the questions are based.
I need read access to a big and complex (i.e.: nested) data
structure of type Node.
But first it needs to be initialized. That can be done with a
default initializer or from a
After initialization there is no need to modify the data anymore.
My first question is: can the data be changed to const once
initialized?
You can have const or immutable data, that can be initialized once.
I tend to use pure functions to do that:
struct Node {
Node[] block;
On Wednesday, 20 August 2014 at 21:26:55 UTC, Philippe Sigaud via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
If you want reference semantics but do not want to have
pointers in
your code, yes classes are your best choice.
Certainly the easiest, but I don't think it's always the best. If
light-weightedness is
10 matches
Mail list logo
