Thread overview | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
March 16, 2007 Re: Extended Type Design. | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Bill Baxter Wrote: > is *already* unreadable (plus I don't think that [3,17] part is legal D). If any reasonable programmer really did have a need for such a type Actually, Bill, it's part of the language spec. http://digitalmars.com/d/arrays.html Look up "Rectangular Arrays" |
March 17, 2007 Re: Extended Type Design. | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dan | Dan wrote:
> Bill Baxter Wrote:
>
>> is *already* unreadable (plus I don't think that [3,17] part is legal D). If any reasonable programmer really did have a need for such a type
>
> Actually, Bill, it's part of the language spec.
> http://digitalmars.com/d/arrays.html
> Look up "Rectangular Arrays"
The only thing even close to that is this:
---
In other languages, this would be called a multidimensional array and be declared as:
double matrix[3,3];
---
Note those first three words...
|
March 17, 2007 Re: Extended Type Design. | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dan | Dan wrote:
> Bill Baxter Wrote:
>
>> is *already* unreadable (plus I don't think that [3,17] part is legal D). If any reasonable programmer really did have a need for such a type
>
> Actually, Bill, it's part of the language spec.
> http://digitalmars.com/d/arrays.html
> Look up "Rectangular Arrays"
Read that part of the spec closely, Dan.
--bb
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation