D vs. placement new (for classes) aka why D needs .sizeof and

[Chris Nicholson-Sauls]

David B. Held wrote:
> Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
>> [...]
>> Uhm... except that we have them already?  Or is this not what you meant:
>>
>> #  interface IToString {
>> #    public char[] toString () ;
>> #  }
>> #
>> #  auto obj = new class IToString {
>> #    public char[] toString () { return "<anonymous class>"; }
>> #  };
> 
> Hmm...that's pretty cool.  I guess that is needed for Java 
> compatibility, huh?
> 
> Dave

I assume that's why we got them.  I really don't remember what justification Walter gave 
for them at the time, but it was probably a requested thing.  Although honestly, the one 
thing I used this often for in Java was event handlers... and in D we have the 
oh-so-beautiful delegates to do that sort of thing.  Plus the three or so Signals/Slots 
implementations floating around, which are also beautiful.  So I have trouble thinking of 
any really compelling use for anonymous objects.

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls