std.boxer and arrays

[Brad Roberts]

Aarti_pl wrote:
> Bill Baxter pisze:
>> Marcin Kuszczak wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>
>>>> Carlos Santander wrote:
>>>>> Maybe I missed something, but does the inclusion of std.variant mean
>>>>> that std.boxer will be deprecated or removed at some point?
>>>>
>>>> Yes. If you're using boxer, take a serious look at variant, and see if
>>>> that works for you.
>>>
>>> There is missing functionality in variant though. I mean converting 
>>> variadic
>>> function parameters into array of Boxes. It's nice, so it should be
>>> retained IMHO.
>>
>> I just used std.boxer for the first time recently.
>> The thing that I found missing was methods for working with and 
>> converting boxed arrays (*not* arrays of boxes).  You can only 
>> unconvert to the exact type of the original, and there's no overloaded 
>> opIndex or getElem/setElem functions.  No way to ask what the type of 
>> an element is either.  I wrote some templates that did the trick for 
>> what I wanted, but I had to copy a few private things out of std.boxer 
>> to do it.  I'd file an enhancement request and maybe even a patch if I 
>> believed anyone would do anything about it.
>>
>> --bb
>>
>>
> 
> You are lucky then :-)
> It seems that std.variant from D 2.0 has such a functionality...
> 
> ----
> 
> With boxing of variadic parameters I meant something like this:
> 
> # void func(...) {
> #   Box[] barr = boxArray(_arguments, _argptr);
> # }
> 
> It can be usefull e.g. for repassing arguments to other function.
> 
> BR
> Marcin Kuszczak

Take a closer look.  Std/variant.d contains:

Variant[] variantArray(T...)(T args)
{
     Variant[] result;
     foreach (arg; args)
     {
         result ~= Variant(arg);
     }
     return result;
}

It's a template rather than using the variadic options, but the end 
result is the same.