On 11/06/2011 14:00, Mafi wrote:
> Am 11.06.2011 14:33, schrieb Alix Pexton:
>>
>> It is by no means a final design, but perhaps a starting point, so
>> suggestions welcome.
>
> What about:
> /++ I wrote an article about D and all I got was ++/
> this.Lousy!T shirt;
>
> //d-programming-language.org

I thought about that, I wasn't sure it would parse as valid D code ><

also, the difference in the line lengths/breaks is less aesthetically pleasing (imho)...

I also considered...


/++ I wrote an article about D
    and all I got was ++/
    this(){
        Lousy!T shirt;
    }

which I know is valid, albeit, pointless D, but it also has a less appealing shape (imho)...

A...

On 11/06/2011 06:50, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Robert Clipsham"<robert@octarineparrot.com>  wrote in message
> news:issvrr$qn3$2@digitalmars.com...
>>
>> You seem to be using cafe press for your other merchandise, there's a tool
>> on there for custom t-shirts.
>>
>> http://www.cafepress.com/cp/customize/makeadesign2.aspx?clear=true&no=321&color=6#designer
>>
>> It's probably easier to do it through there. If not, I could probably make
>> an image.
>>
>> Also, hate to be a grammar nazi, but that should probably be "I wrote this
>> article /about/ D, and all I got was this lousy!T shirt".
>>
>
> Not to be a bikeshed painter, but I'd suggest "I wrote /an/ article..."
> Having "this" in both predicates sounds repetitive. Plus, "this" suggests
> that the article is nearby.

Muphry's law that I missed that :<

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry's_law before you complain about my spelling)

> (Where the hell did that last paragraph I wrote come from? I *know* I didn't
> pay *that* much attention in English class!)

I've also noticed that my ability to write correct English has improved dramatically since I stopped learning it formally.

-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/

On 11/06/2011 14:28, Alix Pexton wrote:
> On 11/06/2011 14:00, Mafi wrote:
>> Am 11.06.2011 14:33, schrieb Alix Pexton:
>>>
>>> It is by no means a final design, but perhaps a starting point, so
>>> suggestions welcome.
>>
>> What about:
>> /++ I wrote an article about D and all I got was ++/
>> this.Lousy!T shirt;
>>
>> //d-programming-language.org
>
> I thought about that, I wasn't sure it would parse as valid D code ><
>
> also, the difference in the line lengths/breaks is less aesthetically
> pleasing (imho)...
>
> I also considered...
>
>
> /++ I wrote an article about D
> and all I got was ++/
> this(){
> Lousy!T shirt;
> }
>
> which I know is valid, albeit, pointless D, but it also has a less
> appealing shape (imho)...
>
> A...

I prefer the initial one. I'd happily acquire such a shirt if one was available.

-- 
Robert
http://octarineparrot.com/

On 11/06/2011 14:28, Alix Pexton wrote:
> On 11/06/2011 14:00, Mafi wrote:
>> Am 11.06.2011 14:33, schrieb Alix Pexton:
>>>
>>> It is by no means a final design, but perhaps a starting point, so suggestions welcome.
>>
>> What about:
>> /++ I wrote an article about D and all I got was ++/
>> this.Lousy!T shirt;
>>
>> //d-programming-language.org
>
> I thought about that, I wasn't sure it would parse as valid D code >< [snip.]

This would: (with minimal context)
T shirt;
struct T{
    T lousy(T)(T arg){return arg;}
    T submitArticle(Article){
        return this.lousy!T(shirt);
    }
}
struct Article{};


Timon

On 6/11/11 1:39 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 11/06/2011 14:28, Alix Pexton wrote:
>> On 11/06/2011 14:00, Mafi wrote:
>>> Am 11.06.2011 14:33, schrieb Alix Pexton:
>>>>
>>>> It is by no means a final design, but perhaps a starting point, so
>>>> suggestions welcome.
>>>
>>> What about:
>>> /++ I wrote an article about D and all I got was ++/
>>> this.Lousy!T shirt;
>>>
>>> //d-programming-language.org
>>
>> I thought about that, I wasn't sure it would parse as valid D code><
>> [snip.]
>
> This would: (with minimal context)
> T shirt;
> struct T{
>      T lousy(T)(T arg){return arg;}
>      T submitArticle(Article){
>          return this.lousy!T(shirt);
>      }
> }
> struct Article{};
>
>
> Timon

We don't have (g|m)onads if we don't make it a range.

Andrei

On 11/06/2011 19:35, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 6/11/11 1:39 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 11/06/2011 14:28, Alix Pexton wrote:
>>> On 11/06/2011 14:00, Mafi wrote:
>>>> Am 11.06.2011 14:33, schrieb Alix Pexton:
>>>>>
>>>>> It is by no means a final design, but perhaps a starting point, so
>>>>> suggestions welcome.
>>>>
>>>> What about:
>>>> /++ I wrote an article about D and all I got was ++/
>>>> this.Lousy!T shirt;
>>>>
>>>> //d-programming-language.org
>>>
>>> I thought about that, I wasn't sure it would parse as valid D code><
>>> [snip.]
>>
>> This would: (with minimal context)
>> T shirt;
>> struct T{
>> T lousy(T)(T arg){return arg;}
>> T submitArticle(Article){
>> return this.lousy!T(shirt);
>> }
>> }
>> struct Article{};
>>
>>
>> Timon
>
> We don't have (g|m)onads if we don't make it a range.
>
> Andrei

I think it is possible to take the d-ification too far ><

A...

"Timon Gehr" <timon.gehr@gmx.ch> wrote in message news:it0cp6$2fdt$1@digitalmars.com...
>
> T shirt;
> struct T{
>    T lousy(T)(T arg){return arg;}
>    T submitArticle(Article){
>        return this.lousy!T(shirt);
>    }
> }
> struct Article{};
>

I like that :)