On Saturday, 25 November 2017 at 10:08:36 UTC, vit wrote:
On Saturday, 25 November 2017 at 09:52:01 UTC, Chirs Forest
wrote:
[...]
import std.meta : staticMap;
class Bar(T) {
T bar;
}
class Foo(Ts...){
staticMap!(Bar, Ts) bars;
this(){
static foreach(i, alias T; Ts) bars
On Saturday, 25 November 2017 at 09:52:01 UTC, Chirs Forest wrote:
I'd like to make a class that takes multiple template types (1
- several) which can hold an array/tuple of a second class that
are instantiated with those types.
class Bar(T) {
T bar;
}
class Foo(T[]){ // not sure how to t
I'd like to make a class that takes multiple template types (1 -
several) which can hold an array/tuple of a second class that are
instantiated with those types.
class Bar(T) {
T bar;
}
class Foo(T[]){ // not sure how to take variadic types here?
Bar!(?)[] bars; //not sure how I'd defi
On 2012-09-11 07:57, Chris Cain wrote:
Ah, I see now.
Well regardless, it couldn't be done so conveniently/transparently
because Serializable!B wouldn't exist in the binary unless it was
actually created in code.
Hence proper runtime reflection is needed. I see no way out of this.
--
/Jacob
On Tuesday, 11 September 2012 at 04:47:11 UTC, timotheecour wrote:
Also, now that I think about it, why couldn't you do this?
(it's equivalent):
auto serialize(T)(T a) {
auto c = cast(SerializerBase) new Serializer!T;
return c.serialize(a);
}
that won't work with my example:
class A{}
c
Also, now that I think about it, why couldn't you do this?
(it's equivalent):
auto serialize(T)(T a) {
auto c = cast(SerializerBase) new Serializer!T;
return c.serialize(a);
}
that won't work with my example:
class A{}
class B:A{int x;}
A a=new B;
auto c=serialize(a); => T is A, but we
On Tuesday, 11 September 2012 at 03:18:40 UTC, timotheecour wrote:
auto serialize(T)(T a){
auto
c=cast(SerializerBase)Object.factory("Serializer!("~typeid(a).to!string~").Serializer");
return c.serialize(a);
}
Also, now that I think about it, why couldn't you do this? (it's
equivalen
On Tuesday, 11 September 2012 at 03:18:40 UTC, timotheecour wrote:
So the question is: is that technically impossible or not to
enhance Object.factory in such ways?
Unless someone else wants to correct me, I'm going to say
technically impossible. Object.factory constructs a class at
runtime giv
I don't understand how Object.factory could help with
serializing. But what would help is if we did get proper
runtime reflection.
All that'd be needed would be to have Object.factory working with
templates, here's how:
unittest{
class A{}
class B{int x;}
A a=new B;
auto
On 2012-09-10 01:27, timotheecour wrote:
Is there a way to use Object.factory with template classes?
eg:
class A(T){
T x;
}
auto a=Object.factory("A!int");
Right now this fails (returns null).
Use case:
If we had this, it would GREATLY simplify serialization (eg as in
Is there a way to use Object.factory with template classes?
eg:
class A(T){
T x;
}
auto a=Object.factory("A!int");
Right now this fails (returns null).
Use case:
If we had this, it would GREATLY simplify serialization (eg as in
the orange library) by not having t
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Arild Boes wrote:
> Actually the f-call syntactic sugar seems like a good way to keep core
> classes of any library very lean and mean, whilst maintaining the ability to
> expand the module without re-compiling the original library! (just import
> this guy, and th
Jarrett Billingsley skrev:
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Arild Boes wrote:
Take a look at the 'this' of D2, it allows to create wrapper structs, so
you can just add methods to the built-in arrays.
Bye,
bearophile
Please elaborate on this. How does one do that?
With the new, delicious "
Jarrett Billingsley:
> Though actually I'm not sure why bearophile suggested this,
The original poster seems to want to add some methods to a standard array. With
this you can give another module something that acts like an array that also
has such methods, or replaces them. With the old way you
On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Arild Boes wrote:
>> Take a look at the 'this' of D2, it allows to create wrapper structs, so
>> you can just add methods to the built-in arrays.
>>
>> Bye,
>> bearophile
>
> Please elaborate on this. How does one do that?
With the new, delicious "alias this."
bearophile skrev:
Andrew Spott:
yes, however there are going to be a few new classes that will be implemented
in this (dot products, cross products, etc)
You mean a few new methods.
Take a look at the 'this' of D2, it allows to create wrapper structs, so you
can just add methods to the buil
Andrew Spott:
> yes, however there are going to be a few new classes that will be implemented
> in this (dot products, cross products, etc)
You mean a few new methods.
Take a look at the 'this' of D2, it allows to create wrapper structs, so you
can just add methods to the built-in arrays.
Bye,
yes, however there are going to be a few new classes that will be implemented
in this (dot products, cross products, etc)
Thanks for the help.
-Andrew
Steven Schveighoffer Wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:33:29 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
> wrote:
>
> > e.g., the following code does almost
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:33:29 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
e.g., the following code does almost the same thing you are doing without
requiring a new class:
correction, the code does *exactly* the same thing you are doing.
-Steve
On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 17:01:28 -0400, Andrew Spott
wrote:
So, the attached is supposed to be a class that creates a vector of any
type (I would like it to only take numerical values (int, float, real,
double, etc), however, I am ok with it taking others (not that I see why
someone would us
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 01:01:28 +0400, Andrew Spott wrote:
So, the attached is supposed to be a class that creates a vector of any
type (I would like it to only take numerical values (int, float, real,
double, etc), however, I am ok with it taking others (not that I see why
someone would use
So, the attached is supposed to be a class that creates a vector of any type (I
would like it to only take numerical values (int, float, real, double, etc),
however, I am ok with it taking others (not that I see why someone would use it
that way).
I tried to compile it with the following, but i
22 matches
Mail list logo
