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