internal/local template memebers

[Denis Koroskin]

On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:05:41 +0400, BCS <ao at pathlink.com> wrote:

> A number of times while working with template code I have found that I  
> need a variable inside a template but don't want the side effects of  
> doing so. Specifically 1) having a tmp variable results in having to  
> explicitly reference template members rather than being able to use the  
> default member rule and 2) the extra symbols seem to result in a  
> substantial increases in the compile time memory usage.
>
> The idea I'm floating would be to have a "local" storage class (or  
> whatever keyword is chosen) that would only be accessible from within  
> the template it is declared in:
>
>
> template Foo(char[] str)
> {
>     local char[] first = str[0..$/2];
>     local char[] last = str[$/2..$];
>
>     const char[] Foo = Foo!(first) ~ Foo!(last); // legal; note not  
> "Foo!().Foo"
>     // const char[] Foo = Foo!(first).a ~ Foo!(last).a; // error a is  
> not accessible
> }
>
> During compilation these variables would be computed, used and thrown  
> away resulting in no long term memory cost.
>
>


I agree! But I would prefer re-using public/private - they make perfect  
sense here - instead of new internal/local keywords.