A nice way to step into 2012

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2011-12-29 10:19, Don wrote:
> On 28.12.2011 17:41, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 2011-12-27 23:27, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>> On 12/27/2011 05:25 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/675898721c04d0bf155a85abf986eae99c37c0dc
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>
>>> Great! =)
>>>
>>> What about making => syntax available to named functions as well?
>>>
>>> class C{
>>> private int x;
>>> int getX() => x;
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>> void main(){
>>> int[] arr;
>>> bool isOdd(int x) => x&1;
>>> writeln(arr.filter!isOdd());
>>> }
>>>
>>
>> I wouldn't say no to that.
>>
>
> I don't think it improves readability, since it doesn't occur in
> arbitrary contexts. It'll always be the only thing on the line.
> I think that example is close to the best case, but
>
> bool isOdd(int x) { return x & 1; }
>
> is not terribly difficult to read.
> So all you're doing is saving 6 characters + one space.
> The longer the return expression becomes, the less it matters.
>
> real isComplicated(int param1, Foo param2, real param3) => 43.4 *
> foo(param2, bar(param2, param1 + param3 * param3,), 556.4 * param1) +
> param3 + param1 *param2 * param2.baz(param1 + 46, param1*2.46);
>
> doesn't look any more readable than the equivalent code with a return
> statement. Especially not in the member function case.
>

When you're implementing a lot of properties that basically just 
forwards to the instance variables it can be really useful.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg