digitalmars.D - deprecating instance Foo(T)
- Walter (10/10) May 05 2004 The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
- J Anderson (4/14) May 05 2004 +1
- vathixSpamFix dprogramming.com (Vathix) (4/14) May 05 2004 I'm OK with removing it. Hasn't it been informally deprecated already?
- Andy Friesen (4/19) May 05 2004 huh. Somehow, I had the impression that it was already gone. I won't
- Mark T (2/8) May 05 2004 no let it go
- Matthew (8/18) May 05 2004 I don't really think we need to deprecate such things at this point (pre...
- J C Calvarese (7/22) May 05 2004 I'd say go ahead and take instance out. (I thought it was already gone.
- J Anderson (5/8) May 05 2004 It was taken out of the specs ages ago. Actually I think at the same
- Patrick Down (2/12) May 05 2004
- James McComb (2/2) May 06 2004 +1
The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
instance Foo(int) foo;
This has been supplanted by the better syntax:
Foo!(int)
The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first
deprecating it, then removing it? Removing it removes some detritus from the
compiler, as well as opening the door for some cool new syntax Matthew and I
have been toying with <g>.
(Deprecating it means issue a compile error on seeing it unless
the -deprecated switch is used.)
May 05 2004
J Anderson <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au>
Walter wrote:
The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
instance Foo(int) foo;
This has been supplanted by the better syntax:
Foo!(int)
The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first
deprecating it, then removing it? Removing it removes some detritus from the
compiler, as well as opening the door for some cool new syntax Matthew and I
have been toying with <g>.
(Deprecating it means issue a compile error on seeing it unless
the -deprecated switch is used.)
+1
--
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/
May 05 2004
In article <c7b7ik$1oqm$1 digitaldaemon.com>, newshound digitalmars.com says...
The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
instance Foo(int) foo;
This has been supplanted by the better syntax:
Foo!(int)
The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first
deprecating it, then removing it? Removing it removes some detritus from the
compiler, as well as opening the door for some cool new syntax Matthew and I
have been toying with <g>.
(Deprecating it means issue a compile error on seeing it unless
the -deprecated switch is used.)
I'm OK with removing it. Hasn't it been informally deprecated already?
--
Christopher E. Miller
May 05 2004
Walter wrote:
The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
instance Foo(int) foo;
This has been supplanted by the better syntax:
Foo!(int)
The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first
deprecating it, then removing it? Removing it removes some detritus from the
compiler, as well as opening the door for some cool new syntax Matthew and I
have been toying with <g>.
(Deprecating it means issue a compile error on seeing it unless
the -deprecated switch is used.)
huh. Somehow, I had the impression that it was already gone. I won't
miss it, obviously. ;)
-- andy
May 05 2004
In article <c7b7ik$1oqm$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write: instance Foo(int) foo; This has been supplanted by the better syntax: Foo!(int) The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first deprecating it, then removing it?no let it go
May 05 2004
I don't really think we need to deprecate such things at this point (pre 1.0).
Just kill it, and post enough notes to let anyone who's used it know of the
change.
There'll be plenty of people to offer help to anyone who posts about having a
problem with it.
So I vote we just kill it now.
"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:c7b7ik$1oqm$1 digitaldaemon.com...
The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
instance Foo(int) foo;
This has been supplanted by the better syntax:
Foo!(int)
The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first
deprecating it, then removing it? Removing it removes some detritus from the
compiler, as well as opening the door for some cool new syntax Matthew and I
have been toying with <g>.
(Deprecating it means issue a compile error on seeing it unless
the -deprecated switch is used.)
May 05 2004
Walter wrote:
The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
instance Foo(int) foo;
This has been supplanted by the better syntax:
Foo!(int)
The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first
deprecating it, then removing it? Removing it removes some detritus from the
compiler, as well as opening the door for some cool new syntax Matthew and I
have been toying with <g>.
(Deprecating it means issue a compile error on seeing it unless
the -deprecated switch is used.)
I'd say go ahead and take instance out. (I thought it was already gone.
Last time I looked I couldn't find it in the official spec, e.g. the
keyword list.)
--
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
May 05 2004
J C Calvarese wrote:I'd say go ahead and take instance out. (I thought it was already gone. Last time I looked I couldn't find it in the official spec, e.g. the keyword list.)It was taken out of the specs ages ago. Actually I think at the same time Walter made the change. -- -Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/
May 05 2004
+1
In article <c7b7ik$1oqm$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
The original way of instantiating a template in D was to write:
instance Foo(int) foo;
This has been supplanted by the better syntax:
Foo!(int)
The older form is obsolete - does anyone have any objection to first
deprecating it, then removing it? Removing it removes some detritus from the
compiler, as well as opening the door for some cool new syntax Matthew and I
have been toying with <g>.
(Deprecating it means issue a compile error on seeing it unless
the -deprecated switch is used.)
May 05 2004