digitalmars.D - Idea: A library non-OOP "dispatch!()()"
- Nick Sabalausky (39/39) Mar 11 2012 Maybe it's just half-asleep crazy-talk, but you know what I think would ...
- Timon Gehr (11/52) Mar 11 2012 A overloadSet(A a){ ... }
- Adam D. Ruppe (7/10) Mar 11 2012 I was thinking the same thing yesterday. Almost literally,
Maybe it's just half-asleep crazy-talk, but you know what I think would be
great in Phobos (I don't *think* it's already there)? A virtual-like
"dispatch" function, which would help ease the rift between template code
and OOP. For example, if you have a class hierarchy, you can do
single-dispatch via method overriding. But if you have a function implemeted
outside the class that uses overloading on type, you have to dispatch
manually:
class FooBase {}
class Foo1 : FooBase {}
class Foo2 : FooBase {}
class Foo3 : FooBase {}
void bar(FooBase f)
{
if(auto _f = cast(Foo1)f)
bar(_f);
else if(auto _f = cast(Foo1)f)
bar(_f);
else if(auto _f = cast(Foo2)f)
bar(_f);
else
throw new Exception("Can't dispatch");
}
void bar(T f) if(is(T : FooBase))
{
// use 'f'
}
Thats a lot of boilerplate!
I'm finding I need to do that sort of thing a lot when using my Goldie lib.
It could be improved with a foreach over a TypeTuple, but it'd be great to
have a "dispatch!()()" or even a multiple dispatch version to just automate
all of that entirely. That would grant D the feature of multidispatch and
non-OOP dispatch *in library*, and really help ease the rift between OOP and
non-OOP styles of coding.
Or, the same thing but without a class hierarchy. For example, if you have
ten different ForwardRange types you want to deal with.
My half-asleep self thinks that that *should* probably be possible to
create. The real trick I think would be in figuring out the
interface/semantics for controlling what types to actually try to dispatch
on.
Mar 11 2012
On 03/11/2012 10:48 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:Maybe it's just half-asleep crazy-talk, but you know what I think would be great in Phobos (I don't *think* it's already there)? A virtual-like "dispatch" function, which would help ease the rift between template code and OOP. For example, if you have a class hierarchy, you can do single-dispatch via method overriding. But if you have a function implemeted outside the class that uses overloading on type, you have to dispatch manually: class FooBase {} class Foo1 : FooBase {} class Foo2 : FooBase {} class Foo3 : FooBase {} void bar(FooBase f) { if(auto _f = cast(Foo1)f) bar(_f); else if(auto _f = cast(Foo1)f) bar(_f); else if(auto _f = cast(Foo2)f) bar(_f); else throw new Exception("Can't dispatch"); } void bar(T f) if(is(T : FooBase)) { // use 'f' } Thats a lot of boilerplate! I'm finding I need to do that sort of thing a lot when using my Goldie lib. It could be improved with a foreach over a TypeTuple, but it'd be great to have a "dispatch!()()" or even a multiple dispatch version to just automate all of that entirely. That would grant D the feature of multidispatch and non-OOP dispatch *in library*, and really help ease the rift between OOP and non-OOP styles of coding. Or, the same thing but without a class hierarchy. For example, if you have ten different ForwardRange types you want to deal with. My half-asleep self thinks that that *should* probably be possible to create.Yes, it is.The real trick I think would be in figuring out the interface/A overloadSet(A a){ ... } B overloadSet(B b){ ... } C overloadSet(B b, C c){ ... } ... auto dispatch!overloadSet(args...) The return type would just be the common type of all overload set return types.semanticsThe main issue is how to deal with ambiguities and non-existence of a suitable method.for controlling what types to actually try to dispatch on.
Mar 11 2012
On Sunday, 11 March 2012 at 09:49:53 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:Maybe it's just half-asleep crazy-talk, but you know what I think would be great in Phobos (I don't *think* it's already there)?I was thinking the same thing yesterday. Almost literally, same name and everything. Somewhere, I had a multiple dispatch thing from the ng that was short and elegant... if I can find that again, adapting for single dispatch shouldn't be too hard, and then, boom, we have it.
Mar 11 2012









Timon Gehr <timon.gehr gmx.ch> 