Auto-invariance (WAS: const )
Janice Caron
caron800 at googlemail.com
Fri Mar 28 13:19:58 PDT 2008
On 28/03/2008, Sean Kelly <sean at invisibleduck.org> wrote:
> Here, the need to create separate, identical implementations for the same
> algorithm that vary only by the constancy of buf simply so the compiler can
> optimize differently for each aspect is horrible.
Stephen addressed that very problem in the thread "const debacle". He
came up with a solution, which I later simplified. It's probably not
something that will happen any time soon, but just to let you know, it
has been thought about, and a solution proposed.
> I would much rather have
> the compiler invisibly generate the different permutations for me and do
> something fancy with the name mangling to sort out all out invisibly. So:
>
> "abc".find( 'b' ); // calls the "invariant(char)[]" permutation
> char[] buf; buf.find( 'b' ); // calls the "const(char)[]" permutation
Yep, that's what we solved. :-)
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list