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