Safer casts

[Dee Girl]

Yigal Chripun Wrote:

> Janice Caron wrote:
> > 2008/5/13 Yigal Chripun <yigal100 at gmail.com>:
> >>  the main thing for me is the syntax:
> >>  look at Nemerle, for example.
> >>  Here's a snippet:
> >>
> >>  class MoreFunctions {
> >>    static run_twice (f : int -> int, v : int) : int
> >>    {
> >>      f (f (v))
> >>    }
> >>
> >>    static run_adder (x : int) : void
> >>    {
> >>      def f (y : int) : int { x + y }; // <==== this is a nested function
> >>      System.Console.WriteLine ("{0}", run_twice (f, 1))
> >>    }
> >>
> >>    public static Run () : void
> >>    {
> >>      run_adder (1);
> >>      run_adder (2);
> >>    }
> >>   }
> > 
> > And the same thing in D:
> > 
> >     class MoreFunctions
> >     {
> >         static run_twice!(alias f)(int v)
> >         {
> >             f(f(v))
> >         }
> > 
> >         static run_adder (x : int) : void
> >         {
> >             int f(int y) { return x + y; };
> >             writefln("{0}", run_twice!(f)(1))
> >         }
> > 
> >         void main()
> >         {
> >             run_adder(1);
> >             run_adder(2);
> >         }
> >     }
> > 
> > What's your point?
> exactly. the point was for Dee about other languages that provide the
> same functionality.

I do not know Nemerle. But the way run_twice looks it is not parameterized statically. So all calls to run_twice will pass a pointer to function and go to the same body. Many languages do it. It is very different from D run_twice which is parameterized statically. There is big difference.

Also you said I talk about inlining. No. Janice is right. I talk about instantiation.

I write too much but I think I can not explain things well. Maybe better I stop in this discussion. Sorry, Dee Girl