new operator overloading
John Demme
me at teqdruid.com
Sun Mar 12 08:26:14 PST 2006
knjhara wrote:
> How about this?
>
> foreach( ...; obj[m .. n] )
>
> means
>
> int obj.opSliceApply(m, n, int delegate(...) dg)
>
> It is removed the necessity of making tmpObj(like struct) for opApply;
>
> --
> knjhara
How would this work with the current syntax? Currently, obj[m .. n] will
return a slice, then run .opApply(delegate...) on the object that the slice
returns. Your above syntax is inconsistent, as it means the compiler would
ignore a slice operator in this case.
I'd imagine that you'd like this for efficiency reasons, so you don't have
to create a new object (or worse, copy an array or something) in order to
iterate through just a few of them.
If obj is a class of your own design, just make a method .iterSlice(n,m)
which returns a struct which can efficiently iterate your objects. It's
not as pretty, but it is consistent.
If you're more concerned about D's built-in arrays- don't be. If you slice
an array, it doesn't immediately copy it. Iterating through an array
slice with the foreach shouldn't require any memory allocations.
...Or am I way off here?
~John Demme
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list