• Aarti_pl (12/12) Mar 07 2008 Did you notice this example in docs?
• Walter Bright (5/17) Mar 07 2008 It's pseudo-code. There is no <== operator nor .~this() in D. I probably...
• Aarti_pl (8/27) Mar 07 2008 Yes, such a pseudo-code should probably be avoided.
• Bill Baxter (4/30) Mar 07 2008 Ohh that's not real code? That is confusing. Just put the pseudocode
• Steven Schveighoffer (47/59) Mar 07 2008 After reading this new feature, I'm really confused. I like the feature...
• Aarti_pl (7/10) Mar 07 2008 Well, it occurred that this example was just a strange kind of "pseudo

Aarti_pl <aarti interia.pl> writes:

Did you notice this example in docs?
(http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/struct.html#AssignOverload)


S* opAssign(S s)
{   S tmp <== *this; // bitcopy *this into tmp
     *this <== s;     // bitcopy s into *this
     tmp.~this();     // call destructor on tmp
     return this;
}

It seems to be something new in D 2.012. Does it work? How?

BR
Marcin Kuszczak
(aarti_pl)

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Aarti_pl wrote:
 Did you notice this example in docs?
 (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/struct.html#AssignOverload)
 
 
 S* opAssign(S s)
 {   S tmp <== *this; // bitcopy *this into tmp
     *this <== s;     // bitcopy s into *this
     tmp.~this();     // call destructor on tmp
     return this;
 }
 
 It seems to be something new in D 2.012. Does it work? How?

It's pseudo-code. There is no <== operator nor .~this() in D. I probably 
made a mistake in presenting it this way, but I was trying to show what 
was going on.

The comments explain what is happening.

Aarti_pl <aarti interia.pl> writes:

Walter Bright pisze:
 Aarti_pl wrote:
 Did you notice this example in docs?
 (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/struct.html#AssignOverload)


 S* opAssign(S s)
 {   S tmp <== *this; // bitcopy *this into tmp
     *this <== s;     // bitcopy s into *this
     tmp.~this();     // call destructor on tmp
     return this;
 }

 It seems to be something new in D 2.012. Does it work? How?

 
 It's pseudo-code. There is no <== operator nor .~this() in D. I probably 
 made a mistake in presenting it this way, but I was trying to show what 
 was going on.
 
 The comments explain what is happening.

Yes, such a pseudo-code should probably be avoided.

I thought that there was silently introduced special copy operator.
... the one that would disambiguate ref copying from object copying for 
example :-)

BR
Marcin Kuszczak
(aarti_pl)

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

Aarti_pl wrote:
 Walter Bright pisze:
 Aarti_pl wrote:
 Did you notice this example in docs?
 (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/struct.html#AssignOverload)


 S* opAssign(S s)
 {   S tmp <== *this; // bitcopy *this into tmp
     *this <== s;     // bitcopy s into *this
     tmp.~this();     // call destructor on tmp
     return this;
 }

 It seems to be something new in D 2.012. Does it work? How?

 It's pseudo-code. There is no <== operator nor .~this() in D. I 
 probably made a mistake in presenting it this way, but I was trying to 
 show what was going on.

 The comments explain what is happening.

 
 Yes, such a pseudo-code should probably be avoided.
 
 I thought that there was silently introduced special copy operator.
 ... the one that would disambiguate ref copying from object copying for 
 example :-)

Ohh that's not real code?  That is confusing.  Just put the pseudocode 
into comments then it won't be as misleading.

--bb

"Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:

"Aarti_pl" wrote in message
 Did you notice this example in docs?
 (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/struct.html#AssignOverload)


 S* opAssign(S s)
 {   S tmp <== *this; // bitcopy *this into tmp
     *this <== s;     // bitcopy s into *this
     tmp.~this();     // call destructor on tmp
     return this;
 }

 It seems to be something new in D 2.012. Does it work? How?

 BR
 Marcin Kuszczak
 (aarti_pl)

After reading this new feature, I'm really confused.  I like the feature, 
but I'm not sure how it works, or why there are two functions for the same 
thing.

How does one use the postblit, and how does one use the opAssign?  It seems 
they both serve the same function, but opAssign allows more control 
possibly?  And does opAssign get called if the postblit doesn't exist or 
vice versa?

Not to knock what you have done, but it would seem to me more reasonable to 
have a single method, and if you wanted to blit the values before your 
custom code, just do:

S* opAssign(ref const S s)
{
   *this = s;
   ...
}

And this would get called on both copy construction and assignment.  The way 
I see it now (if each are individual operations), blitting won't work if the 
source is const and contains a pointer, so that the following confusing 
situation happens:

struct S
{
   int[] buf
   this(this)
   {
       buf  = buf.dup;
   }

   S* opAssign(ref const S s)
   {
       buf = s.buf.dup;
       return this;
   }
}

const S s;
S t = s; // fails because the blit fails
S u;
u = s; // works because no blit occurred

Also it appears that your "equivalent" statement is wrong, or else the 
opAssign signature is wrong:

t = S.opAssign(s);

Doesn't t need to be a struct pointer?  Or else is opAssign not really 
returning a struct pointer?  Does this work?

S u;
u = t = s;

Finally, I don't understand the reasoning for tmp.  It appears to be an 
unused part of the default opAssign...

-Steve 

Aarti_pl <aarti interia.pl> writes:

Steven Schveighoffer pisze:

 After reading this new feature, I'm really confused.  I like the feature, 
 but I'm not sure how it works, or why there are two functions for the same 
 thing.

Well, it occurred that this example was just a strange kind of "pseudo 
code" from Walter (please read the whole thread). I hope he will changed 
it in docs as it is really confusing.

Best Regards
Marcin Kuszczak
(aarti_pl)