[Design] return char[] or string?
Regan Heath
regan at netmail.co.nz
Wed Aug 22 01:58:44 PDT 2007
Stewart Gordon wrote:
> Regan Heath Wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> As for your cases mentioned above...
>>
>> I would probably implement (c), a property setter, as code that
>> sets the member followed by a call to the getter so it would return
>> the same as (b). That said I haven't written a lot of these so
>> perhaps my experience using them isn't sufficient.
>
> I've never really liked this idea. In general, either it would just
> return the same string that was passed in, IWC there's no point
> calling the getter rather than simply returning the argument
I'd hope the call to the getter would be inlined.
The point I see is consistency, the getter might return the stored value
with some sort of modification, perhaps due to a change in required
functionality at some point, or perhaps because more than one getter
uses the same data member.
>, or
> there would be a performance hit where the return value isn't used.
Yeah, that's always going to be a problem. It's a pity we cannot
overload on return type.
> Much better would be if D would chain property assignments
> implicitly:
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/10199.html
>
> If only Walter would finally answer this request (among many others)!
Yeah, this is another of those cases where a property doesn't quite work
the same as a plain old data member, p.property += x; being the more
common one.
Regan
More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn
mailing list