Code fails with linker error. Why?

[ketmar via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Mon, 06 Oct 2014 15:44:34 +0000
John Colvin via Digitalmars-d-learn <digitalmars-d-learn at puremagic.com>
wrote:

> >> I disagree. It's simple and easy to understand.
> > and hackish.
> D is very amenable to slightly hackish code.
D allows to write hackish code, and it's good. but if we can provide a
way to write less hackish code, it's good and preferable, i think. ;-)

> > no hacks needed.
> I meant that without a language change, one does need hacks.
i see.

> That would be nice, although personally I'd prefer
> 
> int A.bar() { return this.hiddenField; }
> 
> as it's less verbose and would be familiar to c++ programmers.
i was trying to not change grammar, that's why i invented that
horribly-looking @implementation attribute. this way the code is still
marked as a hack, but "officially endorsed" hack. besides, attribute
allows to use code blocks:

  @implementation(A) {
    int foo () { ... }
    void bar () { ... }
  }

or even:

  @implementation(A):
    int foo () { ... }
    void bar () { ... }

sure, it has it's own pack of problems:

  @implementation(A) {
    @implementation(B) {
      // I'M LOST!
    }
  }

but we can have both! ;-)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d-learn/attachments/20141006/99c1ff2a/attachment.sig>