dmd 2.029 release

[Daniel Keep]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 09:24:59 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
>> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>>> This has to go into object.d and be part of the runtime, where
>>>> std.range doesn't exist.  There is nothing stopping you from calling:
>>>>  streamOut(&outputrange.put);
>>>>  So I'd rather have a sink function.
>>>
>>> It must be a sink _object_ so it can hold its own state. And it must
>>> support put() so it integrates with statically-bound output ranges.
>>>
>>> interface OutRange
>>> {
>>>      void put(... a number of overloads ...);
>>> }
>>
>> I see now, yes I agree (I think that was don's original request
>> anyways).  That interface has to go in the runtime, though.
>>
>> We may not be able to do this using templates... it has to be a
>> virtual function in Object to be on-par with toString.  This means
>> struct interfaces are a requirement if you want to use ranges :(
> 
> We're in good shape actually. OutRange as a dynamic interface and an
> implicit interface using .put against a struct will work just as well
> with templates. (The template doesn't care whether obj.put(x) is a
> virtual call or statically-bound call.)
> 
> Andrei

"We may not be able to do this using templates... it has to be a virtual
function in Object to be on-par with toString."

Note that toString is a virtual method.  You are proposing replacing
toString with a template.  You cannot have virtual template methods.
Ergo, "new toString" would be inaccessible without the actual type, and
certainly not at runtime.

  -- Daniel