dcollections 1.0 and 2.0a beta released

[Ellery Newcomer]

On 05/21/2010 11:55 AM, Ellery Newcomer wrote:
> On 05/21/2010 09:14 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> Second, since reference types are the right thing to do, classes are
>> much easier to deal with. I know AA's are reference types that are
>> structs, but the code needed to perform this feat is not trivial. The
>> AA has only one member, a reference to the data struct, which is
>> allocated on the heap. Any member function/property that is used on
>> the AA must first check whether the implementation is allocated yet.
>> The only benefit this gives you IMO is not having to use 'new' on it.
>> And even that has some drawbacks. For example, pass an empty AA by
>> value to a function, and if that function adds any data to it, it is
>> lost. But pass an AA by value with one element in it, and the new data
>> sticks. A class gives you much more in terms of options -- interfaces,
>> builtin synchronization, runtime comparison, etc. And it forces full
>> reference semantics by default. I think regardless of whether
>> interfaces are defined for dcollections, classes give a better set of
>> options than structs.
>
>
> Wow. A partially-nullable type.
>
> Great. Now I have to review everywhere I ever used an AA. Thanks, D.
>
> is there any serious drawback to something like
>
> (int[int]).init = InitializedAA!(int,int)
>
> ?

Or should one just always give an AA param either a const or ref modifier?