On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 23:48:54 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 23:14:23 UTC, Engine Machine wrote:
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 15:35:50 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 02:09:21 UTC, Engine Machine
wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 21:25:20 UTC, sldkf
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 23:14:23 UTC, Engine Machine wrote:
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 15:35:50 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 02:09:21 UTC, Engine Machine
wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 21:25:20 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 20:27:01 UTC,
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 15:35:50 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 02:09:21 UTC, Engine Machine wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 21:25:20 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 20:27:01 UTC, Engine Machine
issue solved using a "template this parameter":
On Friday, 12 August 2016 at 02:09:21 UTC, Engine Machine wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 21:25:20 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 20:27:01 UTC, Engine Machine
issue solved using a "template this parameter":
°°
template Cow()
{
void
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 21:25:20 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 20:27:01 UTC, Engine Machine
wrote:
This requires F2 to know the future. It also forces it to use
a specific bar. I want inheritance like logic.
You are goind to hit a wall. Template programming is not
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 21:03:36 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 08/11/2016 01:27 PM, Engine Machine wrote:
> I see the mixin as a sort of copy and paste.
That's the case for string mixins. Template mixins bring a name
resolution scope. My understanding of the topic:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 20:27:01 UTC, Engine Machine wrote:
This requires F2 to know the future. It also forces it to use a
specific bar. I want inheritance like logic.
You are goind to hit a wall. Template programming is not OOP.
I'm not even sure that reflection would work in order to
On 08/11/2016 01:27 PM, Engine Machine wrote:
> I see the mixin as a sort of copy and paste.
That's the case for string mixins. Template mixins bring a name
resolution scope. My understanding of the topic:
http://ddili.org/ders/d.en/mixin.html#ix_mixin.name%20space,%20mixin
The spec:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 19:05:58 UTC, sldkf wrote:
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 17:56:47 UTC, Engine Machine
wrote:
template F1(T)
{
void bar() { writeln("Bar0"); }
}
template F2(T)
{
mixin F1!T;
void foo() { bar(); }
}
template F3(T)
{
mixin F2!T;
void bar() {
On Thursday, 11 August 2016 at 17:56:47 UTC, Engine Machine wrote:
template F1(T)
{
void bar() { writeln("Bar0"); }
}
template F2(T)
{
mixin F1!T;
void foo() { bar(); }
}
template F3(T)
{
mixin F2!T;
void bar() { writeln("Bar1"); } // <- This bar should be
used for F2's foo!
template F1(T)
{
void bar() { writeln("Bar0"); }
}
template F2(T)
{
mixin F1!T;
void foo() { bar(); }
}
template F3(T)
{
mixin F2!T;
void bar() { writeln("Bar1"); } // <- This bar should be used
for F2's foo!
}
struct F4(T)
{
mixin F3!T;
}
(Or on can turn F3 in to a
11 matches
Mail list logo
