On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 at 16:04:29 UTC, Harry Gillanders
wrote:
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 at 14:18:14 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
[...]
If you want to define an integral-like type which is
more-or-less interchangeable with the native integral types,
you'll need to provide the following
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 at 14:18:14 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
I assumed I would have to create a struct type definition and
handle various operators. How many will I have to handle? I
would of course make it a template so I can reuse this
otherwise horribly repetitive code.
You can see a fu
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 at 14:18:14 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
What I would like to do is (in pseudo-code) :
declare_var my_var : int range 0..7; // i.e. 0 <= val <= 7;
my_var = 6; // ok
my_var = 8; // bang ! static assert fail or assert fail at
runtime
my_var = 6;
my_var
On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 at 14:18:14 UTC, Cecil Ward wrote:
What I would like to do is (in pseudo-code) :
declare_var my_var : int range 0..7; // i.e. 0 <= val <= 7;
my_var = 6; // ok
my_var = 8; // bang ! static assert fail or assert fail at
runtime
my_var = 6;
my_var
What I would like to do is (in pseudo-code) :
declare_var my_var : int range 0..7; // i.e. 0 <= val <= 7;
my_var = 6; // ok
my_var = 8; // bang ! static assert fail or assert fail at
runtime
my_var = 6;
my_var += 2; // bang ! value 8 is > 7
So every assignment is range-che