Clay language

Andrei Alexandrescu SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Fri Dec 31 07:35:19 PST 2010


On 12/31/10 9:32 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 12/31/10 7:30 AM, "Jérôme M. Berger" wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> And I stand by that claim. One aspect that seems to have been forgotten
>>> is that types usually implement either op= in terms of op or vice versa.
>>> That savings alone is large.
>>>
>> This could have been done with a couple of stdlib mixins
>> "generateOpsFromOpAssign" and "generateOpAssignsFromOp".
>
> The language definition would have stayed just as large.
>
> Andrei

Besides, I feel a double standard here. Why are mixins bad for 
simplifying certain rarely-needed boilerplate, yet are just fine when 
they supplant a poor design?

Andrei


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list