template mixins vs. string mixins

[div0]

On 06/11/2010 10:13, Don wrote:
> Trass3r wrote:
>> In the past template mixins were a neat special usecase of templates.
>> Now with the "mixin template()" syntax they've become a separate thing
>> because you can add special code for handling them, e.g. allowing them
>> to add constructors to classes.
>>
>> The question is: what is their right to exist? Is there anything you
>> can do with them you can't with string mixins (or vice versa)?
>
> I've personally never seen a use for template mixins.
>

They are handly for boiler plate code that you sometimes just can't avoid.

When you do that stuff template mixins are nicer to work with than 
string mixins, but I keep hitting forward reference bugs with them in 
newer versions of DMD so they've become less useful.

-- 
My enormous talent is exceeded only by my outrageous laziness.
http://www.ssTk.co.uk