interpreted vs. compiled

[Kristian Kilpi]

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:26:41 +0300, Brad Anderson <brad at dsource.org> wrote:

> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> What does it mean for D?  Well maybe For D maybe this could mean a third
>> flavor of aggregate --
>> - struct: low-level value aggregate
>> - class: static polymorphic aggregate
>> - dclass: dynamic polymorphic aggregate (new!)
>>
>> The difference would be that dclass would do everything dynamically ('d'
>> for "dynamic").  All member lookups via strings.  All property accesses
>> via special methods that can be overridden.  In that way you could start
>> coding with dclass, and as bottlenecks appear, you just have to
>> transition the performance critical things from 'dclass' to 'class'.
>> Another alternative is to allow some syntax for dynamic members in a
>> class.  But that seems messier to me somehow.  For instance, from my
>> experience using Qt I was constantly asking myself "should this be a
>> slot? should that be a QProperty?"  Why worry?  Just make 'em all
>> slots/properties.  If you need some non-dynamic things in your dclass,
>> make an inner class that's not dynamic.
>
> Hmm.  It's rather a shame this didn't get any replies.  I like the  
> idea.  I
> wonder if MiniD helps out at all...
>
> BA

Yep, it's a shame (that there were no replies)... but maybe all just  
silently agreed? ;)