[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2013-02-07 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 --- Comment #10 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-02-07 18:14:58 PST --- (In reply to comment #9) > I seemd to have skipped this part of the request. But you can open a new > request for this. OK. The length attribute is useful, to know at what

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2013-02-07 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 --- Comment #9 from Andrej Mitrovic 2013-02-07 16:47:07 PST --- (In reply to comment #8) > It seems the length attribute (and opIndex()) didn't get in this patch. I > don't > know if they are worth another ER. I seemd to have skipped this pa

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2013-02-07 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 --- Comment #8 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-02-07 16:38:57 PST --- It seems the length attribute (and opIndex()) didn't get in this patch. I don't know if they are worth another ER. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/use

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2013-02-07 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 Alex R�nne Petersen changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC|

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2013-02-03 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 --- Comment #7 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2013-02-03 16:03:05 PST --- (In reply to comment #5) > Why was opOpAssign in that pull implemented with returning the 'this' > reference? I saw this in TDPL too, but I don't see the benefit of having t

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2013-02-03 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 Andrej Mitrovic changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull Version|future

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2013-02-03 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 Andrej Mitrovic changed: What|Removed |Added CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2012-03-19 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 Rob Jacques changed: What|Removed |Added CC||sandf...@jhu.edu --- Comment #4 from Rob

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2012-03-12 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 --- Comment #3 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2012-03-12 05:37:11 PDT --- See a discussion thread here, where I have suggested to give Appenhder both "put" method and a "~=" operator: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=dig

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2011-06-08 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 Rob Jacques changed: What|Removed |Added CC||alvaro.seg...@gmail.com --- Comment #2 f

[Issue 4287] opOpAssign!("~=") for std.array.Appender

2011-01-28 Thread d-bugmail
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4287 --- Comment #1 from bearophile_h...@eml.cc 2011-01-28 14:38:22 PST --- The put() method is not easy to remember (other collections use insert(), etc), so for me the ~= is simpler to remember. The needed code for Appender, tested a little: