syntax idea: simplifed ifs

[Derek Parnell]

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 18:03:57 -0600, Hasan Aljudy wrote:

> dennis luehring wrote:
>> for example how often do we use constructs like
>> 
>> if( x ==  10 && x == 20 && x == 30 )
>> 
>> simplified:
>> if( x == [10 && 20 && 30] )
>> 
>> if( a >= h && b >= h && c >= h )
>> 
>> simplified:
>> if( [a && b && c] >= h )
>> 
>> (just an idea)
>> 
>> ciao dennis
> 
> I've always wanted something like this!!!! but I think the proposed 
> syntax might not fit very well with the D grammar.
> 
> hmm, come to think of it, maybe it can already be implemented with 
> templates.
> 
> so,
> 
> if( x == 10 || x == 20 || x == 30 )
> 
> becomes:
> if( equals!(x).anyOf( 10, 20, 30 ) )
> 
> or something like that!
> 
> any template guru up to it?
> 
> On a side note: the expression( x == 10 && x == 20 && x == 30 ) is 
> rediclious, it's always false ;)

Try not using literals ... ;-)

The expression( x == a && x == b && x == c ) is not always false.

-- 
Derek
(skype: derek.j.parnell)
Melbourne, Australia
"Down with mediocracy!"
11/04/2006 10:15:53 AM