On 08/11/2019 09:43 AM, DanielG wrote:
such a simple
error
You're not alone. We want this bug fixed:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17263
Ali
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 20:32:14 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
As I see this, everything you wrote is correct. :)
But you compared abstractness with interface usage, initially.
So... I would say, interfaces are more like the abstract
method case without any function body. But then, you will
On Sunday, August 11, 2019 2:32:14 PM MDT John Colvin via Digitalmars-d-
learn wrote:
> On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 20:15:34 UTC, Alex wrote:
> > As I see this, everything you wrote is correct. :)
> >
> > But you compared abstractness with interface usage, initially.
> > So... I would say,
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 20:32:14 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
E.g. why can I not inherit from multiple 100% abstract empty
classes? Wouldn't that be the same as inheriting from multiple
interfaces?
There's kinda no such thing as 100% empty abstract classes, since
they all have the implicit
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 20:15:34 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 16:05:20 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
I'm trying to narrow down exactly what patterns work with each
and how they overlap.
What I was trying to get at with the abstract method thing is
that
abstract class C
{
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 16:05:20 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
I'm trying to narrow down exactly what patterns work with each
and how they overlap.
What I was trying to get at with the abstract method thing is
that
abstract class C
{
void foo();
}
is an abstract class with a
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 16:32:20 UTC, Simen Kjærås wrote:
[...] Something like this:
import std.meta : Filter;
import std.traits : isFunction;
import std.algorithm.searching : canFind;
enum isNonspecialMemberFunction(string name) =
!ctorAndDtor.canFind(name) &&
Thank you both! Ugh, I have to roll my eyes at missing such a
simple error. (This literally occurred in the context of a bunch
of other code using 'map' and 'reduce' with the exclamation
point, so I don't know why my brain turned off for 'filter')
Thanks again!
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 16:11:15 UTC, DanielG wrote:
int[][] whatever = [
[0],
[0, 1, 2],
[5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
];
writeln(whatever[2]);// [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
writeln(typeid(whatever[2]));// int[]
auto x = whatever[2].filter(x => x > 7); // error
On 11.08.19 18:11, DanielG wrote:
auto x = whatever[2].filter(x => x > 7); // error
You just forgot an exclamation mark here.
auto x = whatever[2].filter!(x => x > 7); // works
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 15:27:54 UTC, Sjoerd Nijboer wrote:
The following snippet doesn't compile
I am trying to reflect on a class and only do an operation with
all member functions of a class.
But I can't seem to use a filter to only get the member
functions out of a type T.
I
int[][] whatever = [
[0],
[0, 1, 2],
[5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
];
writeln(whatever[2]);// [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]
writeln(typeid(whatever[2]));// int[]
auto x = whatever[2].filter(x => x > 7); // error
Error: template std.algorithm.iteration.filter cannot deduce
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 15:16:03 UTC, Alex wrote:
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 13:09:43 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Ok. What would go wrong (in D) if I just replaced every
interface with an abstract class?
I think there's some confusion here, because B.foo is not
abstract. abstract on a
The following snippet doesn't compile
I am trying to reflect on a class and only do an operation with
all member functions of a class.
But I can't seem to use a filter to only get the member functions
out of a type T.
I understand that there are two errors in my snippet.
1) It cannot mixin a
On Sunday, 11 August 2019 at 13:09:43 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
Ok. What would go wrong (in D) if I just replaced every
interface with an abstract class?
I think there's some confusion here, because B.foo is not
abstract. abstract on a class is not inherited by its methods.
On Saturday, 10 August 2019 at 17:28:32 UTC, Alex wrote:
´´´
void main(){}
interface A { void fun(); }
abstract class B{ void fun(); }
class C : A{ void fun(){} }
class D : B{ /*override*/ void fun(){} }
´´´
case 1:
interface A and class C implementing interface A:
You don't need to "override"
On Saturday, 10 August 2019 at 17:46:37 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 10.08.19 16:29, John Colvin wrote:
Ok. What would go wrong (in D) if I just replaced every
interface with an abstract class?
interface A{}
interface B{}
class C: A,B{ }
Yes, I know, I guess it wasn't clear unless you read
On Saturday, 10 August 2019 at 16:44:48 UTC, greatsam4sure wrote:
On Saturday, 10 August 2019 at 15:42:39 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
This is a crazy question but is your Windows install 64bit?
yes. See the spec below
https://ibb.co/M1TwY7W
I am currently assuming it is not a general
18 matches
Mail list logo
