June 19, 2007
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:25:32 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:

> Kristian Kilpi wrote:
>> 
>> This is a small detail, but I found myself wondering why the class invariant declarations have now parenthesis (in 2.0, that is).
> 
> It was to remove syntactical ambiguities.

 ... at the cost of understanding for humans ...

The "overloaded" keyword problem with D is just getting worse and worse.

I know you are a compiler writer and doing such things as you are makes it easier for the compiler, but the continually overloading of keywords with different (but similar) meanings in D is bordering on the illegible. What you are doing, inadvertently, is making D harder for people to learn, understand, and read.


-- 
Derek
(skype: derek.j.parnell)
Melbourne, Australia
"Justice for David Hicks!"
19/06/2007 12:02:06 PM
June 19, 2007
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 05:06:08 +0300, Derek Parnell <derek@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:25:32 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> Kristian Kilpi wrote:
>>>
>>> This is a small detail, but I found myself wondering why the class
>>> invariant declarations have now parenthesis (in 2.0, that is).
>>
>> It was to remove syntactical ambiguities.
>
>  ... at the cost of understanding for humans ...
>
> The "overloaded" keyword problem with D is just getting worse and worse.
>
> I know you are a compiler writer and doing such things as you are makes it
> easier for the compiler, but the continually overloading of keywords with
> different (but similar) meanings in D is bordering on the illegible. What
> you are doing, inadvertently, is making D harder for people to learn,
> understand, and read.
>

I agree.

(I have a feeling that Walter is reluctant to do something like this, but) if the keyword for the class invariants will be changed, I vote for:

  invarianttest

It's similar to 'unittest', and who knows, maybe there will be structure invariants someday also.
June 28, 2007
Derek Parnell wrote:
> The "overloaded" keyword problem with D is just getting worse and worse. 
> 
> I know you are a compiler writer and doing such things as you are makes it
> easier for the compiler, but the continually overloading of keywords with
> different (but similar) meanings in D is bordering on the illegible. What
> you are doing, inadvertently, is making D harder for people to learn,
> understand, and read.

I think so. The 'mixin' keyword is a similar example as well. I think for string evaluation it should be 'eval' (as in other languages).


-- serg.
June 29, 2007
Ary Manzana wrote:
> [...]
> unittest() {
> }
> 
> Which leaves the possibility to specify something between the parens:
> 
> unittest("List adds correctly an element") {
> }
> 
> and then when an assert fails within a unittest, that message could also be displayed.
> [...]

I proposed something very much like that, and even coded up the front-end portion, so that one could construct a library that is a worthy competitor to JUnit et al, but nobody was interested (Andrei even went so far as to mock it!...but I don't think his xUnit-foo is up to snuff ;).

Dave
June 29, 2007
If it compiles under 2.001, any way you could post it up here, please? Sounds useful. I've been eying Thomas Khune's UnittestWalker which is powerful, but nothing like a real language extension.

David B. Held Wrote:

> Ary Manzana wrote:
> > [...]
> > unittest() {
> > }
> > 
> > Which leaves the possibility to specify something between the parens:
> > 
> > unittest("List adds correctly an element") {
> > }
> > 
> > and then when an assert fails within a unittest, that message could also
> > be displayed.
> > [...]
> 
> I proposed something very much like that, and even coded up the front-end portion, so that one could construct a library that is a worthy competitor to JUnit et al, but nobody was interested (Andrei even went so far as to mock it!...but I don't think his xUnit-foo is up to snuff ;).
> 
> Dave

June 30, 2007
Robert Fraser wrote:
> If it compiles under 2.001, any way you could post it up here, please? Sounds useful. I've been eying Thomas Khune's UnittestWalker which is powerful, but nothing like a real language extension.

I couldn't finish it because I didn't have the back end to build it with.  I suppose I could try hacking GDC, though.

Dave
Next ›   Last »
1 2
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home