typeof(func!0) != typeof(func!0())

Andrey Zherikov andrey.zherikov at gmail.com
Mon Aug 22 17:40:59 UTC 2022

On Monday, 22 August 2022 at 16:42:50 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
> It's probably not worth completely changing your API design 
> just to work around this issue. Also, even if you do this, it 
> is still possible for a user to run into a same problem with a 
> member function of one of their own types; for example:
> ```d
> import your.library;
> struct MyStruct {
>     U myFunc() { /* ... */ }
> }
> @(MyStruct.myFunc) whatever;
> ```

This will be users' issue then, not mine :)

I'm providing a struct (`U` in examples above) with some API and 
I'm looking for this struct as an UDA (through 
`hasUDA`/`getUDAs`). And actually I already have a mix of 
member-functions and free-functions in my API so it's gonna be 
more consistent if I make all of them free-functions.

More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn mailing list