So why was typedef bad?
Chris Wright via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Wed Aug 31 07:05:16 PDT 2016
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:44:51 +0000, Ethan Watson wrote:
> http://dlang.org/deprecate.html#typedef
>
> "typedef is not flexible enough to cover all use cases. This is better
> done with a library solution."
>
> [Citation needed]
>
> What use cases is it not flexible enough for?
Specifying the default value for the type. Making all typedefs from a
base type implicitly convert to each other without warning unless you're
careful, which should be a bug (the default discriminator should be
__MODULE__ + __LINE__, and instead it's null).
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list