What about C's -> ?
ibisbasenji at gmail.com
Tue Jul 24 13:50:15 PDT 2007
Bill Baxter wrote:
> freeagle wrote:
>> Hoenir wrote:
>>> There seems to be no p->x in D. Is there any other syntactic sugar
>>> for (*p).x ?
>> dot operator stands for both dot and -> operators in c++
> Just curious -- does it also work for (**p).x and (***p).x etc?
> (Sorry to lazy to check :-P ) But surely someone here knows right off
> the top of their head.
As far as I recall, yes. The '.' will "continuously" dereference until
it hits something solid, and then offset appropriately from there.
Although I rarely have had more than (*p) in my experience with D. (And
usually only with referencing elements from arrays of structures, and
with using the 'in' operator on associative arrays.)
-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls
More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn