Revised RFC on range design for D2

[Bill Baxter]

On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>> Basically there's no convenient way to take the address of one of a
>> getter/setter function pair, currently.  I think that should factor in
>> the solution here.
>
> Overloading is the issue, and that's quite a different story.

It's a different, but intertwined story.

> If you know
> the exact type, you can take the address of something.
>
> struct S
> {
>    int foo() {}
>    void foo(int) {}
> }
>
> void main()
> {
>    S s;
>    void delegate(int) x = &s.foo;
>    int delegate() y = &s.foo;
> }

Having to write out "delegate(argumenttype) doesn't qualify as
"convenient" in my book.


--bb