Why Templates?

[Sean Kelly]

Walter Bright wrote:
> "Sean Kelly" <sean at f4.ca> wrote in message 
> news:duda9o$137k$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>> is a bit annoying and reduces readability.  ITI is also quite useful in 
>> C++ with respect to how overload resolution is handled, but I have no idea 
>> how this will translate to the far simpler overloading rules in D. I think 
>> we really may have to simply want and see what Walter comes up with for 
>> ITI in D, as simply eliminating the need to explicitly specify template 
>> parameters doesn't encompass the full utility of ITI in C++. Will we be 
>> able to overload template functions with each other?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> Will they also overload with non-template functions?
> 
> No. This is a misfeature in C++, and the equivalent can be done with 
> explicitly specialized template functions.

Cool.  I feel pretty much the same.

>> What happens if there are multiple matches?
>>
>>     class C(T) {}
>>
>>     template func(T) { void func( T val ) {} }
>>     template func(T) { void func( C!(T) val ) {} }
>>     void func( C!(int) val ) {}
>>
>>     func( new C!(int) );
>>
>> In C++, this is legal and the result is clearly defined (the "most 
>> specialized" overload is called), but how will this translate to D?
> 
> It'll be the most specialized.

Very nice :-)  Yet more to look forward to!


Sean