On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 11:30:01PM +, Vlad Levenfeld via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Tuesday, 29 July 2014 at 15:47:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn
> wrote:
> >Maybe we should file an enhancement bug to improve error reporting
> >for opDispatch.
>
> I found this https://issues.
On Tuesday, 29 July 2014 at 15:47:08 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Maybe we should file an enhancement bug to improve error
reporting for
opDispatch.
I found this https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8387
and cast a vote for it.
I've cast a few votes in the bugtracker, do
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 06:57:00PM +0200, Artur Skawina via Digitalmars-d-learn
wrote:
> On 07/29/14 17:45, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> > You're right, opDispatch behaves like SFINAE. I've had trouble
> > debugging it before, because when it works, it works very well, but
> > when
On 07/29/14 17:45, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> You're right, opDispatch behaves like SFINAE. I've had trouble debugging
> it before, because when it works, it works very well, but when you
> accidentally make a typo, it just "disappears" -- you get an error that
> the property is mi
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 03:34:22AM +, Vlad Levenfeld via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> opDispatch behaves as though it has SFINAE. When something fails in
> the definition (like I am having now, some of the symbols I used in it
> hadn't been imported) there won't ever be an error message, I jus
opDispatch behaves as though it has SFINAE. When something fails
in the definition (like I am having now, some of the symbols I
used in it hadn't been imported) there won't ever be an error
message, I just get "Error: no property 'bar' for type 'Foo'"
In one case I had to use static ifs and pr
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 08:40:42 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 00:43:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 05:14:44PM +, via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hmmm... thinking about it, is this possible?
1. Remove the constraints to matc
On Sunday, 27 July 2014 at 00:43:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 05:14:44PM +, via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
Hmmm... thinking about it, is this possible?
1. Remove the constraints to match anything.
2. Inside the template, have some construct that
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 05:14:44PM +, via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> Hmmm... thinking about it, is this possible?
>
> 1. Remove the constraints to match anything.
> 2. Inside the template, have some construct that enumerates all possible
> overloads and UFCS functions that are visible at the
Hmmm... thinking about it, is this possible?
1. Remove the constraints to match anything.
2. Inside the template, have some construct that enumerates all
possible overloads and UFCS functions that are visible at the
point of instantiation.
3. If this set contains only the current template, use
Yeah that's the price we pay for the simplicity.
Also most constraints directly or indirectly consist of a complex
boolean expressions and you don't get any hint which part failed
and why.
I have a template function with a particular constraint (in this
case [1]). When this constraint doesn't match, I want to give the
user a suggestion what to do instead.
The only way I know of to do this currently is to relax the
template constraints, and adding a `static assert`. However, if
12 matches
Mail list logo
