Could new keyword help function hijacking and prevented aliasing all over the place??

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2011-05-27 16:38, Matthew Ong wrote:
> On 5/27/2011 9:37 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 2011-05-27 13:42, Matthew Ong wrote:
>>> On 5/27/2011 7:08 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> Maybe you are not doing something correctly, you shouldn't need this
> feature all the time.
> Not me, others that has coded the dwt and I suspect other code in
> dsource where they tries to mimic Java Library and perhaps C# also.
>>
>> DWT is a direct port of the Java library SWT and it tries to stay as
>> close to the original code base as possible to easy merges of future
>> release of SWT.
> No problem.I have not worked too much with SWT but people from
> development world told me they really do not like Swing. Yes. I agree
> because of the heavy/deep tree inheritance/too much manual
> copy/paste/undo sort handling. Different topic.
>
>  >DWT is manually ported from Java. A automatic port was tried and it
>  >didn't workout that well, too much of the Java standard library needed
>  >to be reimplemented in D.
> Yes. I notice that and notice that the language converter does
> not work that well because of the semantics of differences in the
> languages. Not impossible, but too heavy. Unless something like
> JRuby(JVM) and also IronRuby(.NET) is done and made use of the existing
> script engine extensions with existing API libray.
>
>> When coding my own projects (projects I've written from scratch and not
>> ported from other languages) it's a feature I rarely use, don't know if
>> I ever have used it.
> Actually from scratch is NOT a good approach and migration approach. How
> do you
> justify this to business management people or to your client? There are
> also your
> learning cycle time.

Of course, from "scratch" can be interpreted in different ways. I use 
the standard library and other libraries I need. But often when 
developing tools for D one can't use already existing tools because they 
don't support D or, in my opinion, aren't good enough. BWT, I don't have 
to justify my own private projects to anyone. One last thing: what's 
wrong with developing something from scratch just for the fun of it or 
for learning something from it :)

> Using Java well know Model-View-Controller as a simple model as a
> discussion. See:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model%E2%80%93view%E2%80%93controller
>
> Model= Business Data/IO/Persistance storage
> Controller= Business Logic and where transaction code are done.
> View= GUI/Web/Webservices(I am aware webservice is not a view)/Console.
> Interconnection = how all the MVC are interacting with each other. Those
> arrow in the diagram top right.
>
> Model and Controller typically are similar if not identical across
> different languages and platform. Most people would just do as much
> POJO(Plain Old Java Object) as possible here.
>
> However when it comes to the View and Interconnection...Those typically
> changed when moving into different platform. Unless there is someone
> that port them. Nothing much can be done here.

I'm working with the MVC design pattern every day at work (Ruby on Rails).

>  >it's a feature I rarely use, don't know if I ever have used it.
> Because of many years of object-relational database management system
> (ORDBMS). Most Database table even the flat one like Mysql are design
> with this concept in mind. Hence, the Model and Controller will have
> plenty of inheritance tree and mutually dependent code. That would mean
> alias would be used.

As I said above: I'm using the MVC design pattern every day at work with 
Ruby on Rails which has, in my opinion, a great ORM library. It's not 
very often I create a class hierarchy of the models. Bacially the only 
hierarchy that exists is inheriting form the framework classes but when 
separating the framework from the user code there's basically no 
hierarchy in the user code.

> If porting SWT has already such syntax and scatted aliases, that would
> be the burden that coder would have to take on, may I stress, could have
> been taken over my compiler with new sets of keyword.

I can tell you this: after porting (almost) the whole SWT Mac OS X 
version to D I haven't seen this as a problem. Just inserting a few 
aliases and the problem is solved.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg