ICTI and ISTI
dsimcha
dsimcha at yahoo.com
Mon Nov 9 12:26:29 PST 2009
== Quote from Lars T. Kyllingstad (public at kyllingen.NOSPAMnet)'s article
> IFTI -- implicit function template instantiation -- is a pretty nifty
> feature in D, which allows code that calls templated functions to be
> written in a nice, clear way.
> Would it be possible to extend it to also work for class/struct
> construction, so that the type of a templated class can be deduced from
> its constructor's arguments? Here's an example of what I mean:
> class Foo(T)
> {
> T bar;
> this(T t) { bar = t; }
> }
> auto foo = new Foo(1.0); // The type of foo is now Foo!double
> I've found myself wishing for this in several cases. Sometimes the
> template specification has been so involved that I've ended up writing
> factory methods instead of ordinary constructors. But then, the classes
> in question become inconsistent with the rest of my code, and I hate
> inconsistencies.
> I've only seen this mentioned once before, in bug report 1856, but none
> of the comments in that report say anything more about it.
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1856
> Are there specific reasons why ICTI and ISTI wouldn't work?
> -Lars
I guess this is just yet another symptom of c'tors being "special". However, IDK
how we c'tors **not** special because they have the exclusive privilege of setting
immutable data. This should probably be considered as part of the "what to do
about new" discussion.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list