C++ guys hate static_if?

[H. S. Teoh]

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:39:48PM +0100, TommiT wrote:
> On Tuesday, 12 March 2013 at 04:34:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> >It's interfaces without the vtable[].
> >
> >It's still solely based on type signatures. D constraints make
> >pretty much anything that can be computed at compile time a
> >testable gate.
> 
> Yeah, you're right. That kind of interface syntax doesn't really
> lend itself to specifying concepts. So, here's another attempt at
> a concept syntax (and functionality):
> 
> concept AscendingInfiniteInputRange {
>      // 'this' is an instance of a type which implements the
>      // AscendingInfiniteInputRange concept given the
>      // if-condition below is true:
>      if( is(typeof(this.empty) : bool)
>      &&  is(typeof(this.front))
>      && !is(typeof(this.front) == void)
>      &&  is(typeof(this.popFront() == void)
>      // testing a compile time evaluable value:
>      &&  this.empty == false
>      // static members can also be tested:
>      &&  typeof(this).infinite == true
>      &&  typeof(this).sortedAscending == true )
> }

How is this any different from the current isInputRange!R,
isForwardRange!R, etc.?


T

-- 
Дерево держится корнями, а человек - друзьями.