www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - D1.0 Feature request

reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Julio_C=E9sar_Carrascal_Urquijo?= writes:
First I have to thank Walter for the latest batch of features added to 
D. I'm sure I'll be using Lazy Evaluation and Function Literals a lot.

Now we have one more "literal" in our language but some basic ones are 
still missing. Struct Literal and Array Literal have been previously 
discussed in length and I'm gonna skip the reasons and just add some 
links to past discussions:

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/28621.html
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/17267.html
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/25674.html
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/12920.html

Array Literals are also mentioned here as if D had them already:
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/builtin.html

What do you think? Should D 1.0 have this expressions?

There's also another feature (Anonymous Structs) that I'm still missing 
but that's probably a D 2.0 thing.
Aug 21 2006
parent Chad J <gamerChad _spamIsBad_gmail.com> writes:
Julio CÚsar Carrascal Urquijo wrote:
 First I have to thank Walter for the latest batch of features added to 
 D. I'm sure I'll be using Lazy Evaluation and Function Literals a lot.
 
 Now we have one more "literal" in our language but some basic ones are 
 still missing. Struct Literal and Array Literal have been previously 
 discussed in length and I'm gonna skip the reasons and just add some 
 links to past discussions:
 
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/28621.html
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/17267.html
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/25674.html
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/12920.html
 
 Array Literals are also mentioned here as if D had them already:
 http://www.digitalmars.com/d/builtin.html
 
 What do you think? Should D 1.0 have this expressions?
 
 There's also another feature (Anonymous Structs) that I'm still missing 
 but that's probably a D 2.0 thing.

That stuff would be nice, but IMO it can wait until after 1.0. It doesn't break backwards compatibility, so after 1.0 it won't have to wait until 2.0, assuming we leave backwards breaking changes until each next major version. Also, I just don't see the lack of these features as harming to D's image as other things like erraneous documentation on the digitalmars d website or ... 'access violation' (could we get line numbers or something?).
Aug 21 2006