• James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> Sep 11 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Sep 11 2001
• James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> Sep 12 2001
• Erik Rounds <erikr aatrix.com> Sep 12 2001
• Erik Rounds <erikr aatrix.com> Sep 12 2001
• James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> Sep 13 2001
• Erik Rounds <erikr aatrix.com> Sep 13 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Sep 18 2001
• "Sean L. Palmer" <spalmer iname.com> Oct 23 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Nov 23 2001
• "Ben Cohen" <bc skygate.co.uk> Sep 12 2001
• James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> Sep 13 2001
• "Ben Cohen" <bc skygate.co.uk> Sep 13 2001
• Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja estarcion.com> Sep 13 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Sep 20 2001
• Charles Hixson <charleshixsn earthlink.net> Sep 20 2001
• a <a b.c> Sep 20 2001
• John Fletcher <J.P.Fletcher aston.ac.uk> Sep 21 2001
• "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> Oct 10 2001
• "Rajiv Bhagwat" <dataflow vsnl.com> Oct 10 2001

James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> writes:

Is there a way to find out which class an object belongs
to?  If not, how about obj.class?

BTW, I think there is a buglet in the doc:

  D does not have a Java style instanceof operator,
  because the cast operator performs the same function: 

          Java:
                  if (a instanceof B)
          D:
                  if ((B) a)

should be:        if (cast(B) a)

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

1) Yes, there will be a .class or some such. -Walter

2) I am undecided if the cast syntax should be like C or like cast(B) a.

"James Gilbert" <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:3B9DF36F.81584272 sanger.ac.uk...
 Is there a way to find out which class an object belongs
 to?  If not, how about obj.class?

 BTW, I think there is a buglet in the doc:

   D does not have a Java style instanceof operator,
   because the cast operator performs the same function:

           Java:
                   if (a instanceof B)
           D:
                   if ((B) a)

 should be:        if (cast(B) a)

James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> writes:

Walter wrote:
 
 1) Yes, there will be a .class or some such. -Walter


Great.

 2) I am undecided if the cast syntax should be like C or like cast(B) a.


I like the explicit "cast".  I thought you were sold
on it from the doc, where you say it removes context-
sensitive parsing of "()".

	James

 "James Gilbert" <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote in message
 news:3B9DF36F.81584272 sanger.ac.uk...
 Is there a way to find out which class an object belongs
 to?  If not, how about obj.class?

 BTW, I think there is a buglet in the doc:

   D does not have a Java style instanceof operator,
   because the cast operator performs the same function:

           Java:
                   if (a instanceof B)
           D:
                   if ((B) a)

 should be:        if (cast(B) a)

Erik Rounds <erikr aatrix.com> writes:

type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the distinction
between class members and primitive type information.  There could be a
Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer my two
cents.

Walter wrote:

 1) Yes, there will be a .class or some such. -Walter

 2) I am undecided if the cast syntax should be like C or like cast(B) a.

 "James Gilbert" <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote in message
 news:3B9DF36F.81584272 sanger.ac.uk...
 Is there a way to find out which class an object belongs
 to?  If not, how about obj.class?

 BTW, I think there is a buglet in the doc:

   D does not have a Java style instanceof operator,
   because the cast operator performs the same function:

           Java:
                   if (a instanceof B)
           D:
                   if ((B) a)

 should be:        if (cast(B) a)

Erik Rounds <erikr aatrix.com> writes:

oops, sorry I guess I lost the first line.  Here it is again:

Why don't we use a tick operator ' to retrieve data from a primitive
type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the distinction
between class members and primitive type information.  There could be a
Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer my two
cents.

Erik Rounds wrote:

 type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the distinction
 between class members and primitive type information.  There could be a
 Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer my two
 cents.

 Walter wrote:

 1) Yes, there will be a .class or some such. -Walter

 2) I am undecided if the cast syntax should be like C or like cast(B) a.

 "James Gilbert" <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote in message
 news:3B9DF36F.81584272 sanger.ac.uk...
 Is there a way to find out which class an object belongs
 to?  If not, how about obj.class?

 BTW, I think there is a buglet in the doc:

   D does not have a Java style instanceof operator,
   because the cast operator performs the same function:

           Java:
                   if (a instanceof B)
           D:
                   if ((B) a)

 should be:        if (cast(B) a)

James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> writes:

Erik Rounds wrote:
 
 oops, sorry I guess I lost the first line.  Here it is again:
 
 Why don't we use a tick operator ' to retrieve data from a primitive
 type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the distinction
 between class members and primitive type information.  There could be a
 Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer my two
 cents.


My $0.02 is that the tick operator plays merry hell
with syntax highlighting in editors.

	James

Erik Rounds <erikr aatrix.com> writes:

I'm sure that editors can be made to accomidate.  Anyway, the point is having an
operator which won't be confused with the . or -> operator.  I know that the ->
operator won't be used in D, but I think we should avoid using it in order to
avoid confusing C++ programmers new to the language.

James Gilbert wrote:

 Erik Rounds wrote:
 oops, sorry I guess I lost the first line.  Here it is again:

 Why don't we use a tick operator ' to retrieve data from a primitive
 type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the distinction
 between class members and primitive type information.  There could be a
 Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer my two
 cents.


 My $0.02 is that the tick operator plays merry hell
 with syntax highlighting in editors.

         James

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

James Gilbert wrote in message <3BA08D12.894CA875 sanger.ac.uk>...
Erik Rounds wrote:
 oops, sorry I guess I lost the first line.  Here it is again:

 Why don't we use a tick operator ' to retrieve data from a primitive
 type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the




 between class members and primitive type information.  There could be a
 Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer my




 cents.


My $0.02 is that the tick operator plays merry hell
with syntax highlighting in editors.



The ' operator would make it impossible to tokenize the language separately
from syntax analysis. Perhaps the : would work better.

"Sean L. Palmer" <spalmer iname.com> writes:

Or you could use #

Sean

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:9o99bv$a8v$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 James Gilbert wrote in message <3BA08D12.894CA875 sanger.ac.uk>...
Erik Rounds wrote:
 oops, sorry I guess I lost the first line.  Here it is again:

 Why don't we use a tick operator ' to retrieve data from a primitive
 type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the




 between class members and primitive type information.  There could be a
 Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer my




 cents.


My $0.02 is that the tick operator plays merry hell
with syntax highlighting in editors.



 The ' operator would make it impossible to tokenize the language


 from syntax analysis. Perhaps the : would work better.

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

Yes, # would work.

"Sean L. Palmer" <spalmer iname.com> wrote in message
news:9r3dsr$a27$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Or you could use #

 Sean

 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:9o99bv$a8v$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 James Gilbert wrote in message <3BA08D12.894CA875 sanger.ac.uk>...
Erik Rounds wrote:
 oops, sorry I guess I lost the first line.  Here it is again:

 Why don't we use a tick operator ' to retrieve data from a primitive
 type?  Like Foo'class or Array'length.  This would provide the




 between class members and primitive type information.  There could be








 Foo.class without there being any confusion.  Just thought I'd offer








 two
 cents.


My $0.02 is that the tick operator plays merry hell
with syntax highlighting in editors.



 The ' operator would make it impossible to tokenize the language


 from syntax analysis. Perhaps the : would work better.

"Ben Cohen" <bc skygate.co.uk> writes:

In article <3B9DF36F.81584272 sanger.ac.uk>, "James Gilbert"
<jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote:

 Is there a way to find out which class an object belongs to?  If not,
 how about obj.class?
 
 BTW, I think there is a buglet in the doc:
 
   D does not have a Java style instanceof operator, because the cast
   operator performs the same function:
 
           Java:
                   if (a instanceof B)
           D:
                   if ((B) a)
 
 should be:        if (cast(B) a)


Doesn't this have an ambiguity if B is a boolean type variable (or int if
there is no boolean)?  I.e., we could be asking "Is a of type B?" or "Is a
true when cast to type B?"


Incidentally, I noted elsewhere that C's -> notation might not be needed
in D.   If you don't mind using it for something else, then casts
would be a possible use:

  foo->long

You could even introduce a new operator, =>, for instanceof so that the
following are different:

  if (a->int)...
  if (a=>int)...


(Properties would be another possible use:  myvar->size)

James Gilbert <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> writes:

Ben Cohen wrote:
 
 In article <3B9DF36F.81584272 sanger.ac.uk>, "James Gilbert"
 <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote:
 
 Is there a way to find out which class an object belongs to?  If not,
 how about obj.class?

 BTW, I think there is a buglet in the doc:

   D does not have a Java style instanceof operator, because the cast
   operator performs the same function:

           Java:
                   if (a instanceof B)
           D:
                   if ((B) a)

 should be:        if (cast(B) a)


 Doesn't this have an ambiguity if B is a boolean type variable (or int if
 there is no boolean)?  I.e., we could be asking "Is a of type B?" or "Is a
 true when cast to type B?"


Good point.

I was also thinking that an "instanceof" operator
might be able to do less work than a cast to get
you the answer.  I suppose the compiler could work
out that the cast was being used in boolean context,
but this would be surpising to the programmer, and
deviate from Walter's idea of a context-free
compiler.

 Incidentally, I noted elsewhere that C's -> notation might not be needed
 in D.   If you don't mind using it for something else, then casts
 would be a possible use:
 
   foo->long
 
 You could even introduce a new operator, =>, for instanceof so that the
 following are different:
 
   if (a->int)...
   if (a=>int)...
 
 (Properties would be another possible use:  myvar->size)


I would try to avoid operators that are used for
different things in similar languages!

"Ben Cohen" <bc skygate.co.uk> writes:

In article <3BA08FBC.158C9162 sanger.ac.uk>, "James Gilbert"
<jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote:

 Incidentally, I noted elsewhere that C's -> notation might not be
 needed in D.   If you don't mind using it for something else, then
 casts would be a possible use:
 
   foo->long
 




 I would try to avoid operators that are used for different things in
 similar languages!


That is sensible ... but a pity to leave the notation unused!

Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja estarcion.com> writes:

Ben Cohen wrote:
 
 In article <3BA08FBC.158C9162 sanger.ac.uk>, "James Gilbert"
 <jgrg sanger.ac.uk> wrote:
 
 Incidentally, I noted elsewhere that C's -> notation might not be
 needed in D.   If you don't mind using it for something else, then
 casts would be a possible use:

   foo->long




 I would try to avoid operators that are used for different things in
 similar languages!


 That is sensible ... but a pity to leave the notation unused!


Perhaps if the parser sees a "->" token, it could open a web browser to a page
titled "D for C Programmers".

-RB

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

Russell Bornschlegel wrote in message <3BA0E8CF.5BFDE051 estarcion.com>...
Perhaps if the parser sees a "->" token, it could open a web browser to a


titled "D for C Programmers".




I'm still looking for a use for the error message:

    "fix card deck and resubmit job"

Charles Hixson <charleshixsn earthlink.net> writes:

Walter wrote:

 ...
 I'm still looking for a use for the error message:
 
     "fix card deck and resubmit job"
 


You could have a sample that implements a deck editor for FreeCell.

a <a b.c> writes:

Walter wrote:
 
 Russell Bornschlegel wrote in message <3BA0E8CF.5BFDE051 estarcion.com>...
Perhaps if the parser sees a "->" token, it could open a web browser to a


titled "D for C Programmers".


 I'm still looking for a use for the error message:
 
     "fix card deck and resubmit job"


Display it if any variable named foo, bar, baz or foobar is used
incorrectly.

Dan

John Fletcher <J.P.Fletcher aston.ac.uk> writes:

Walter wrote:

 Russell Bornschlegel wrote in message <3BA0E8CF.5BFDE051 estarcion.com>...
Perhaps if the parser sees a "->" token, it could open a web browser to a


titled "D for C Programmers".


 I'm still looking for a use for the error message:

     "fix card deck and resubmit job"


I once had a job fail because the following job had been put onto the card
reader upside down, and became data for my program.  FORTRAN of course, about
1970.

John

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:

John Fletcher wrote in message <3BAAFEB8.3E001B7 aston.ac.uk>...
Walter wrote:
 Russell Bornschlegel wrote in message




Perhaps if the parser sees a "->" token, it could open a web browser to






 page
titled "D for C Programmers".


 I'm still looking for a use for the error message:

     "fix card deck and resubmit job"


I once had a job fail because the following job had been put onto the card
reader upside down, and became data for my program.  FORTRAN of course,


1970.



It's nice to know there are some people who have been programming longer
than me <g>. And yes, my first programs were on punch cards.

"Rajiv Bhagwat" <dataflow vsnl.com> writes:

Walter <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:9q14m0$12ed$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 John Fletcher wrote in message <3BAAFEB8.3E001B7 aston.ac.uk>...
Walter wrote:
 Russell Bornschlegel wrote in message




Perhaps if the parser sees a "->" token, it could open a web browser








 a
 page
titled "D for C Programmers".


 I'm still looking for a use for the error message:

     "fix card deck and resubmit job"


I once had a job fail because the following job had been put onto the




reader upside down, and became data for my program.  FORTRAN of course,


1970.



 It's nice to know there are some people who have been programming longer
 than me <g>. And yes, my first programs were on punch cards.


I used cards in 1975, but encountered a Russian computer (Model: Minsk-2)
with very hard pushbuttons in '79. These buttons would light lamps and
frequently were stuck. How about some use for the message:
'Push harder, then it might work!'

Ps: Not to be behind, next to the Russian m/c was a Hewlett-Packard machine,
using Buttons and Lights: HP-21! The buttons here were a lot smoother and
had lights behind them, as the console was very small.