DIP53 and DIP49 (ver2) - New definitions for qualified constructors and postblits

H. S. Teoh hsteoh at quickfur.ath.cx
Wed Dec 18 11:48:20 PST 2013


On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 08:09:54PM +0100, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On 18/12/13 19:40, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >For this reason, it is better to write 'const' on the right side of
> >the function name than on the left
> 
> Yes, and it's exactly the practice I follow, although Ddoc replaces
> it on the left-hand side ... :-)

I know, and IMO this deserves a bug in bugzilla. The idea behind Ddoc is
very good, but there are quite a few areas in the current implementation
that leaves one disappointed, and this is one of them. (I know I'm
opening a can of worms here, since a good number of people prefer
writing function modifiers on the left, but I feel strongly enough about
this to bring it up. :P)


> >And also to always write `const(int)` rather than the potentially
> >ambiguous `const int`. It may feel unnecessarily verbose at first,
> >until you have to distinguish between:
> >
> >	const(int)[] func();
> >	const(int[]) func();
> >	int[] func() const;
> >	const(int)[] func() const;
> >	const(int[]) func() const;
> >
> >then you begin to appreciate the notation. :)
> 
> Well, quite :-)  I'm not complaining about the issues here, I'm
> suggesting that inventing an extra keyword for the cases discussed
> in these DIPs is not necessary, because the analogy and connection
> with existing use of const/immutable is valuable.

Yes.


T

-- 
Windows: the ultimate triumph of marketing over technology. -- Adrian von Bidder


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list