class extensions

[Chris Nicholson-Sauls]

Nathan Reed wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
>>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>> kris wrote:
>>>> So my feeling is that for this to be more useful:
>>>> 1) Extension members should be marked as such and *only* be allowed 
>>>> to be called with member syntax.  Those not marked as such will not 
>>>> be allowed to be called with member syntax.  (if you need both then 
>>>> it's easy enough to write a trivial forwarding function.)
>>>
>>> Its not a bad idea.  The "trivial forwarding function" should be 
>>> inlineable anyhow.  Maybe a "context" parameter?  Something like:
>>> size_t indexOf : T[] array (T) (T elem) { ... }
>>>
>>> Where the (':' param) after the function name creates the 
>>> context-param.  Other examples:
>>>
>>> ulong area : IShape shp () { ... }
>>>
>>> void unique : inout T[] array (T) () { ... }
>>>
>>>
>>> Its just a random on-the-spot idea.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe even just use a semi-colon instead of comma in the arg list?
>>   size_t indexOf(T)(T[] array; T elem) { ... }
>>   ulong area (IShape shp;) { ... }
>>   void unique (ref T[] array; T) () { ... }
>>
>> --bb
> 
> I like that syntax; something similiar is used in mathematics on 
> occasion.  Simple and elegant.
> 
> Thanks,
> Nathan Reed

Agreed.  I believe the use of semicolons within params was once suggested for another 
purpose, ages ago, and (obviously) went nowhere.  Maybe this suggestion will be a bit more 
lucky.

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls