www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Open concerns for D before 1.0

reply Kramer <Kramer_member pathlink.com> writes:
I know that D is primarily in a bug fix phase, but it still couldn't hurt to
list some open concerns from everyone and see where the bits fall.  Feel free to
add to the list to keep everything in one place.

1) Can't overload opCmp for both array .sort and <> operators (also opEquals).
I still am not sure if overloading the .sort(opCmp) function for arrays is legal
(from the lang. spec. POV), but you have to declare the function in a different
way than if you want to overload the <> operators.  Humph, maybe Walter wants it
that way to make it obvious as to what you're doing.  But it'd be nice to hear
if that's a supported feature of the language or if it's bad practice.  If it is
supported, can we get one way to define opCmp and opEquals.
digitalmars.D/16535
digitalmars.D.bugs/2642

2) DMD should be able to accept spaces in directory paths.  I haven't been able
to use spaces in my paths for imports.  (I have not tried with the latest
release).

3) I can't seem to find the posting, but I thought there was some discussion on
having the compiler create a symbol table for imports so you didn't always have
to have the source available when importing.  (I think I got that right.
/Please/ correct me if I didn't).

-Kramer
Mar 02 2005
parent reply "Carlos Santander B." <csantander619 gmail.com> writes:
Kramer wrote:
 I know that D is primarily in a bug fix phase, but it still couldn't hurt to
 list some open concerns from everyone and see where the bits fall.  Feel free
to
 add to the list to keep everything in one place.
 
 1) Can't overload opCmp for both array .sort and <> operators (also opEquals).
 I still am not sure if overloading the .sort(opCmp) function for arrays is
legal
 (from the lang. spec. POV), but you have to declare the function in a different
 way than if you want to overload the <> operators.  Humph, maybe Walter wants
it
 that way to make it obvious as to what you're doing.  But it'd be nice to hear
 if that's a supported feature of the language or if it's bad practice.  If it
is
 supported, can we get one way to define opCmp and opEquals.
 digitalmars.D/16535
 digitalmars.D.bugs/2642
 

I don't understand. You can override opCmp and opEquals. Now, if you want this to work: MyClass [] foo; ... foo.sort; You have to define opCmp like this: class MyClass { ... int opCmp(Object o) { ... } ... } It should take an Object so it works. The problem with .sort is that you can't override it, e.g.: what if you want a different sorting algorithm?
 2) DMD should be able to accept spaces in directory paths.  I haven't been able
 to use spaces in my paths for imports.  (I have not tried with the latest
 release).
 
 3) I can't seem to find the posting, but I thought there was some discussion on
 having the compiler create a symbol table for imports so you didn't always have
 to have the source available when importing.  (I think I got that right.
 /Please/ correct me if I didn't).

What you can do is this: // foo.d module foo; int bar() { return 3; } Compile it and (optionally) put it in a library. Then, you can distribute the library and a stripped version of your file(s): // foo.d module foo; int bar(); And then just use it: // baz.d module baz; import foo; void main(){ int f=bar(); } And then do this: dmd baz foo.lib (or dmd baz libfoo.a) And it'll work.
 
 -Kramer
 
 

_______________________ Carlos Santander Bernal
Mar 02 2005
parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
Carlos Santander B. wrote:
 Kramer wrote:

 1) Can't overload opCmp for both array .sort and <> operators (also 
 opEquals).


 I don't understand. You can override opCmp and opEquals. Now, if you 
 want this to work:

 class MyClass

The OP and both the referenced posts were talking about structs (and unions), not classes.
 The problem with .sort is that you can't override it, e.g.: what if you 
 want a different sorting algorithm?

Write a function to implement the algorithm of your choice and call it instead of sort.
 2) DMD should be able to accept spaces in directory paths.  I haven't 
 been able to use spaces in my paths for imports.  (I have not tried with the
latest
 release).


Do you mean be able to use spaces in the -I switch? I imagine you have to use quotation marks - or is this what you're trying? Stewart. -- My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Mar 03 2005
parent reply Kramer <Kramer_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <d07aad$2v2q$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Stewart Gordon says...
Carlos Santander B. wrote:
 Kramer wrote:

 1) Can't overload opCmp for both array .sort and <> operators (also 
 opEquals).


 I don't understand. You can override opCmp and opEquals. Now, if you 
 want this to work:

 class MyClass

The OP and both the referenced posts were talking about structs (and unions), not classes.

I thought that my one post referenced a class ex., guess I'm wrong. Well, it still holds though. I guess I was just getting at one way of defining the function declaration. One takes an a reference, another takes a pointer. It's not the biggest deal; just hoping for some consistency, or at least an explanation as to why the difference.
 The problem with .sort is that you can't override it, e.g.: what if you 
 want a different sorting algorithm?

Write a function to implement the algorithm of your choice and call it instead of sort.

I was hoping for something more elegant and that looked more natural to the way the language is defined. It would be cool to write your own sort and then override/register the new sort function with an array. Again, cool, not show stopper. Although, I do think elegance (and this may not be the best ex.) adds to the appeal of a language.
 2) DMD should be able to accept spaces in directory paths.  I haven't 
 been able to use spaces in my paths for imports.  (I have not tried with the
latest
 release).


Do you mean be able to use spaces in the -I switch? I imagine you have to use quotation marks - or is this what you're trying?

Yeah. I couldn't find the other posts, but I've tried it all which ways. Quotation marks, environment variables... around the world and back. I finally just took out the spaces.
Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on 
the 'group where everyone may benefit.

Mar 03 2005
next sibling parent reply "Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> writes:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:05:20 +0000 (UTC), Kramer  
<Kramer_member pathlink.com> wrote:
 The problem with .sort is that you can't override it, e.g.: what if you
 want a different sorting algorithm?

Write a function to implement the algorithm of your choice and call it instead of sort.

I was hoping for something more elegant and that looked more natural to the way the language is defined. It would be cool to write your own sort and then override/register the new sort function with an array. Again, cool, not show stopper. Although, I do think elegance (and this may not be the best ex.) adds to the appeal of a language.

A little known "feature" is that if you have: void quicksort(char[] arr) { } you can call it with: char[] bob; bob.quicksort; I'm not 100% positive it's an intended feature, or that it's going to stay (can someone clarify this?). I sicerely hope it stays, it's kewl. I'm not sure whether this holds true if you use templates, but it would be really nifty if it did as you could then write a templated quicksort for sorting anything with an opCmp (including also basic types). eg. template quicksort(Type:Type[]) { void quicksort(Type[] arr) { ..etc.. }} Regan
Mar 03 2005
next sibling parent reply pragma <pragma_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <opsm2xy0hn23k2f5 ally>, Regan Heath says...
A little known "feature" is that if you have:

void quicksort(char[] arr) {
}

you can call it with:

char[] bob;
bob.quicksort;

One concern I have is that although this is a very useful feature in the language, it *only* applies to array types (unless that changed post v0.97). It'd be nice to get this to work with scalars too.
 void foobar(int i){}
 int x;
 x.foobar(); // etc

Its a nice half-step between writing a full-blown struct and doing things the old-fashioned way, plus it makes the language more consistent. - EricAnderton at yahoo
Mar 03 2005
parent "Regan Heath" <regan netwin.co.nz> writes:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 21:36:46 +0000 (UTC), pragma  
<pragma_member pathlink.com> wrote:
 In article <opsm2xy0hn23k2f5 ally>, Regan Heath says...
 A little known "feature" is that if you have:

 void quicksort(char[] arr) {
 }

 you can call it with:

 char[] bob;
 bob.quicksort;

One concern I have is that although this is a very useful feature in the language, it *only* applies to array types (unless that changed post v0.97). It'd be nice to get this to work with scalars too.

Everything except class, struct and union, due to possible collision problems, eg. class A { void foo() { } } void foo(A a) { } A a = new A(); a.foo(); //which do we call? Although we could detect and make the above an error, it probably shouldn't ever occur, right? Regan
Mar 03 2005
prev sibling parent Kramer <Kramer_member pathlink.com> writes:
Nice.  Thanks for the info!

In article <opsm2xy0hn23k2f5 ally>, Regan Heath says...
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 16:05:20 +0000 (UTC), Kramer  
<Kramer_member pathlink.com> wrote:
 The problem with .sort is that you can't override it, e.g.: what if you
 want a different sorting algorithm?

Write a function to implement the algorithm of your choice and call it instead of sort.

I was hoping for something more elegant and that looked more natural to the way the language is defined. It would be cool to write your own sort and then override/register the new sort function with an array. Again, cool, not show stopper. Although, I do think elegance (and this may not be the best ex.) adds to the appeal of a language.

A little known "feature" is that if you have: void quicksort(char[] arr) { } you can call it with: char[] bob; bob.quicksort; I'm not 100% positive it's an intended feature, or that it's going to stay (can someone clarify this?). I sicerely hope it stays, it's kewl. I'm not sure whether this holds true if you use templates, but it would be really nifty if it did as you could then write a templated quicksort for sorting anything with an opCmp (including also basic types). eg. template quicksort(Type:Type[]) { void quicksort(Type[] arr) { ..etc.. }} Regan

Mar 03 2005
prev sibling parent "Carlos Santander B." <csantander619 gmail.com> writes:
Kramer wrote:
 In article <d07aad$2v2q$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Stewart Gordon says...
 
Carlos Santander B. wrote:
The problem with .sort is that you can't override it, e.g.: what if you 
want a different sorting algorithm?

Write a function to implement the algorithm of your choice and call it instead of sort.

I was hoping for something more elegant and that looked more natural to the way the language is defined. It would be cool to write your own sort and then override/register the new sort function with an array. Again, cool, not show stopper. Although, I do think elegance (and this may not be the best ex.) adds to the appeal of a language.

What I wanted to say, just actually using words :D _______________________ Carlos Santander Bernal
Mar 03 2005