Proof of concept - library AA

[Uranuz via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 30 May 2015 at 08:22:21 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 May 2015 at 00:50:39 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
> wrote:
>> I suggest first we build a library AA that sits beside real 
>> AA, even if it doesn't . Then we create a test suite to prove 
>> that the library AA can be a drop in replacement. Then replace 
>> it :)
>
> Writing the AA is NOT the problem, but I doubt we can get 
> compatible enough to replace the built-in AA. Rather it'll 
> require to deprecate a few built-in AA semantics and adding 
> operator and literal extensions for the library type.
> Hence the proposal to start with a HQ library AA and 
> incrementally converge them.

My idea is slihtly of topic.
I thiking about some API for array and associative array 
literals. Something similar to our range API: front, popFront, 
etc. It would be good (as I think) if programmer could be able to 
use Array, or AA literal directly (like maybe initializer list in 
C++). So for example some class or struct could be initialized 
from AA literal directly. And another option could be having 
heterogenous types in Array and AA, so we could use them in a way 
we work with tuples. So we could use AA literal to initialize 
JSON objects directly for example using different types of values 
inside.

auto json = [ "name": "John", "age": 30, "interests": 
["programming", "D lang"] ];

Also we could be able to initialize tuple from such heterogenous 
Array literal. So literals would be not only available for 
processing by core language and runtime, but also for regular D 
classes, structs and templates. It could significantly help with 
initializing complex objects. It would be big change. But what do 
you thing about just about idea?