How about appender.put() with var args?

Messenger via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Wed Apr 15 13:51:22 PDT 2015


On Wednesday, 15 April 2015 at 19:09:42 UTC, Márcio Martins wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I use Appender a lot, and find it ugly to write this all the 
> time to efficiently construct strings:
>
> app.put("foo");
> app.put(var);
> app.put("bar");
>

Sidetracking a bit, but when I started using Appender I was 
surprised to see that put didn't return a reference to the 
Appender itself. Had it done so, you could have chained your put 
calls very nicely.

app.put("foo")
    .put(var)
    .put("bar")
    .put(more)
    .put("stuff");

You can naturally write a small wrapper function that does this 
for you, but it still strikes me as odd. Sadly I imagine changing 
the return type would make the function signature mangle 
differently, breaking ABI compatibility.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list