Review of std.signal

Robert jfanatiker at gmx.at
Sun Nov 10 03:32:39 PST 2013


On Sunday, 10 November 2013 at 10:37:41 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2013-11-09 23:50, Robert wrote:
> 1
>> Nice. But you trade it for protection having a default value, 
>> making the
>> syntax more verbose in the general case.
>
> You can overload it:
>
> template signal (string name, Args...)
>

Smartass! ;-) Of course this would work, not bad! I am not sure 
whether this additional wrapper it is worth its salt, but it is 
definitely a nice alternative. I will absolutely think about it. 
Thanks!


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list