duck!

[JimBob]

I'd get used to Jimmy!, and thats a nice name too.



  "Jimmy Cao" <jcao219 at gmail.com> wrote in message news:mailman.635.1287179560.858.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
  It doesn't matter if it sounds unintuitive to you right now,
  eventually if you keep using it, the word will stick.
  duck! is a nice name, so I'm fine with the idea.


  On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:46 PM, JimBob <jim at bob.com> wrote:


    "Andrei Alexandrescu" <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote in message
    news:i9ae2n$k9g$1 at digitalmars.com...

    >I was talking to Walter about Kenji's adaptTo. We both think it's a very
    >powerful enabler, but adaptTo is a bland name. After discussing a few
    >marketing strategies, I proposed "duck". It's short, simple, and evokes
    >"duck typing".
    >
    > class C
    > {
    >     int draw(){ return 10; }
    > }
    > interface Drawable
    > {
    >     long draw();
    > }
    > ...
    > auto c = new C;
    > auto d = duck!Drawable(c); // awes
    >
    > Kenji, I'll be looking forward to your submission :o). Would be great to
    > allow structs to duck, too!


    duck doesnt convey much meaning imo so.. why not "adapt!"

    Ties in with the Adaptor design pattern.. which i'm guessing is what it
    actualy does.




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20101015/1b334839/attachment.html>