www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.learn - How to translate C# 'readonly' keyword into D

reply "o3o" <orfeo.davia gmail.com> writes:
I'm a C# programmer, when I apply IoC pattern  I use "readonly" 
keyword 
(http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/acdd6hb7%28v=vs.71%29.aspx) 
in this manner:

:// C# code
:interface IFoo {
:  void Fun();
:}
:
:class Foo: IFoo {
:  void Fun() {...}
:}
:class Bar {
:  private readonly IFoo foo;
:  // inject IFoo into Bar
:  Bar(IFoo foo) {
:    // assert(foo != null);
:    this.foo = foo;
:  }
:  void Gun() {
:    // foo = new Foo(); //// ERROR: foo is readonly!
:    foo.Fun();
:  }
:}

Can someone help me to translate "readonly IFoo foo;" so that the 
dmd compiler raises an error when I write "foo = new Foo();" ?

I try:
:// D code
:interface IFoo {
:   void fun();
:}
:
:class Foo: IFoo {
:   void fun() {
:      writeln("fun...");
:   }
:}
:
:class Bar {
:   private const IFoo service;
:   this(const IFoo service) {
:      this.service = service;
:   }
:
:   void gun() {
:      service.fun();
:   }
:}
:unittest {
:  const(IFoo) s = new Foo;
:  auto bar = new Bar(s);
:  bar.gun();
:}
but the compiler complains:
Error: function main.IFoo.fun () is not callable using argument 
types () const
Feb 04 2013
next sibling parent reply "simendsjo" <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 09:02:31 UTC, o3o wrote:
 I'm a C# programmer, when I apply IoC pattern  I use "readonly" 
 keyword 
 (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/acdd6hb7%28v=vs.71%29.aspx) 
 in this manner:

 :// C# code
 :interface IFoo {
 :  void Fun();
 :}
 :
 :class Foo: IFoo {
 :  void Fun() {...}
 :}
 :class Bar {
 :  private readonly IFoo foo;
 :  // inject IFoo into Bar
 :  Bar(IFoo foo) {
 :    // assert(foo != null);
 :    this.foo = foo;
 :  }
 :  void Gun() {
 :    // foo = new Foo(); //// ERROR: foo is readonly!
 :    foo.Fun();
 :  }
 :}

 Can someone help me to translate "readonly IFoo foo;" so that 
 the dmd compiler raises an error when I write "foo = new 
 Foo();" ?

 I try:
 :// D code
 :interface IFoo {
 :   void fun();
 :}
 :
 :class Foo: IFoo {
 :   void fun() {
 :      writeln("fun...");
 :   }
 :}
 :
 :class Bar {
 :   private const IFoo service;
 :   this(const IFoo service) {
 :      this.service = service;
 :   }
 :
 :   void gun() {
 :      service.fun();
 :   }
 :}
 :unittest {
 :  const(IFoo) s = new Foo;
 :  auto bar = new Bar(s);
 :  bar.gun();
 :}
 but the compiler complains:
 Error: function main.IFoo.fun () is not callable using argument 
 types () const
In D, everything accessible from const is also const. You specifically state that you will not modify your IFoo instance. But then you call foo(). foo() in turn isn't marked as const, so this can modify IFoo, and thus break const. So.. Every method you call through a const instance must also be const, otherwise you have the ability to change something that should be a constant.
Feb 04 2013
next sibling parent "simendsjo" <simendsjo gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 10:26:55 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
 On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 09:02:31 UTC, o3o wrote:
 I'm a C# programmer, when I apply IoC pattern  I use 
 "readonly" keyword 
 (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/acdd6hb7%28v=vs.71%29.aspx) 
 in this manner:

 :// C# code
 :interface IFoo {
 :  void Fun();
 :}
 :
 :class Foo: IFoo {
 :  void Fun() {...}
 :}
 :class Bar {
 :  private readonly IFoo foo;
 :  // inject IFoo into Bar
 :  Bar(IFoo foo) {
 :    // assert(foo != null);
 :    this.foo = foo;
 :  }
 :  void Gun() {
 :    // foo = new Foo(); //// ERROR: foo is readonly!
 :    foo.Fun();
 :  }
 :}

 Can someone help me to translate "readonly IFoo foo;" so that 
 the dmd compiler raises an error when I write "foo = new 
 Foo();" ?

 I try:
 :// D code
 :interface IFoo {
 :   void fun();
 :}
 :
 :class Foo: IFoo {
 :   void fun() {
 :      writeln("fun...");
 :   }
 :}
 :
 :class Bar {
 :   private const IFoo service;
 :   this(const IFoo service) {
 :      this.service = service;
 :   }
 :
 :   void gun() {
 :      service.fun();
 :   }
 :}
 :unittest {
 :  const(IFoo) s = new Foo;
 :  auto bar = new Bar(s);
 :  bar.gun();
 :}
 but the compiler complains:
 Error: function main.IFoo.fun () is not callable using 
 argument types () const
In D, everything accessible from const is also const. You specifically state that you will not modify your IFoo instance. But then you call foo(). foo() in turn isn't marked as const, so this can modify IFoo, and thus break const. So.. Every method you call through a const instance must also be const, otherwise you have the ability to change something that should be a constant.
So this works: interface IFoo { void fun() const; } class Foo : IFoo { void fun() const {} } class Bar { private const IFoo service; this(const IFoo service) { this.service = service; } void gun() { service.fun(); } } unittest { const s = new Foo(); auto bar = new Bar(s); bar.gun(); } void main() {}
Feb 04 2013
prev sibling parent reply "o3o" <orfeo.davia gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 10:26:55 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
 [cut]
 So.. Every method you call through a const instance must also 
 be const, otherwise you have the ability to change something 
 that should be a constant.
Thanks simendsjo, now I get it... So, let me continue the example (I remove "const" for simplicity)... I would like check that bar.gun() call fun() function from IFoo unittest { auto foo = new Mock<IFoo>(); //Will not compile.Mock doesn't (yet) exist auto bar = new Bar(foo); bar.gun(); foo.Received().fun(); // pass if 'fun' was called } void main() {} In other words, I need a mock object like nsubstitute (http://nsubstitute.github.com/help/getting-started/) or moq (http://code.google.com/p/moq/) In your old post http://forum.dlang.org/thread/il29hs$2svt$1 digitalmars.com you were asking for mocking frameworks...do you found any solution? Thanks
Feb 04 2013
next sibling parent "rumbu" <rumbu rumbu.ro> writes:
First, AFAIK, there is no equivalent of C# "readonly" in D, 
despite the fact that D uses 3 keywords for various kinds of 
immutability.

Second, here you can find a  mocking library for D: 
http://www.dsource.org/projects/dmocks/wiki/DMocks



On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 13:35:24 UTC, o3o wrote:
 On Monday, 4 February 2013 at 10:26:55 UTC, simendsjo wrote:
 [cut]
 So.. Every method you call through a const instance must also 
 be const, otherwise you have the ability to change something 
 that should be a constant.
Thanks simendsjo, now I get it... So, let me continue the example (I remove "const" for simplicity)... I would like check that bar.gun() call fun() function from IFoo unittest { auto foo = new Mock<IFoo>(); //Will not compile.Mock doesn't (yet) exist auto bar = new Bar(foo); bar.gun(); foo.Received().fun(); // pass if 'fun' was called } void main() {} In other words, I need a mock object like nsubstitute (http://nsubstitute.github.com/help/getting-started/) or moq (http://code.google.com/p/moq/) In your old post http://forum.dlang.org/thread/il29hs$2svt$1 digitalmars.com you were asking for mocking frameworks...do you found any solution? Thanks
Feb 04 2013
prev sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-04 14:35, o3o wrote:

 So, let me continue the example (I remove "const" for simplicity)...
 I would like check that bar.gun() call fun() function from IFoo

 unittest {
       auto foo = new Mock<IFoo>(); //Will not compile.Mock doesn't (yet)
 exist
       auto bar = new Bar(foo);
       bar.gun();
       foo.Received().fun(); // pass if 'fun' was called
 }

 void main() {}
The syntax for template instantiation is: auto foo = new Mock!(IFoo)(); -- /Jacob Carlborg
Feb 04 2013
prev sibling parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 2013-02-04 10:02, o3o wrote:
 I'm a C# programmer, when I apply IoC pattern  I use "readonly" keyword
 (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/acdd6hb7%28v=vs.71%29.aspx) in
 this manner:

 :// C# code
 :interface IFoo {
 :  void Fun();
 :}
 :
 :class Foo: IFoo {
 :  void Fun() {...}
 :}
 :class Bar {
 :  private readonly IFoo foo;
 :  // inject IFoo into Bar
 :  Bar(IFoo foo) {
 :    // assert(foo != null);
 :    this.foo = foo;
 :  }
 :  void Gun() {
 :    // foo = new Foo(); //// ERROR: foo is readonly!
 :    foo.Fun();
 :  }
 :}

 Can someone help me to translate "readonly IFoo foo;" so that the dmd
 compiler raises an error when I write "foo = new Foo();" ?
The closest would probably be defining a property with only a getter: class Bar { private IFoo foo_; private property foo () { return foo_; } this (IFoo foo) { foo_ = foo; } } You can still change the "foo_" variable. -- /Jacob Carlborg
Feb 04 2013