Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of a structinfo. It's just not the same animal as a class, and trying to mush the two together into classinfo seems a mistake.

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:a8nk19$1qvo$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "Patrick Down" <pat@codemoon.com> wrote in message news:Xns91E86C7657A97patcodemooncom@63.105.9.61...
>
> > All that is needed is a little extra atribute to access the information.
>
> You are of course right. I should have thought a bit more about this =)
>
> > struct Abc
> > {
> > }
> >
> > Abc astruct;
> > ClassInfo b = astruct.type;
>
> Since ClassInfo is class-specific and contains fields like destructor and
> vtbl[],
> it's probably better to define another class just for structs:
>
>     class StructInfo
>     {
>         struct FieldInfo
>         {
>             char[] name;
>             uint offset;
>             ...
>         }
>
>         char[] name;
>         uint[FieldInfo] fields;
>     }
>
> And then:
>
>     Foo foo;
>     StructInfo fooinfo = foo.structinfo;
>
>
>

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:a8n8h9$1dh2$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "OddesE" <OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a8n4sq$19ub$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> > I wouldn't call class completion, no matter how much I
> > like it, the best feature of Delphi...  :)
>
> Why not?
>

Because I like it's drag-and-drop form editing
capabilities and the object inspector etc. more  :)
This is what sets Delphi apart from the crowd.
Visual Studio also has code completion (although it's
a little buggy), but it's drag and drop form editing
comes nowhere near that of Delphi! It's improved
(read: More like Delphi) in .net though!  ;)

But I *love* code completion too!


> By the way, Delphi is just an example of such approach - there are no
> headers there, and units can be in compiled form - and still you
> get the CodeComplete working. The solution is to store information
> about types and functions, probably in some binary form (or XML?) in a
> separate
> file, generated by the compiler when it processes the module. So,
> for each module, you get an .obj with the code in it, and, say,
> a .dmi (D module interface) with all public members listed. Then,
> both the compiler and the IDE can rely on information in this file.
>

You are right.


--
Stijn
OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com
http://OddesE.cjb.net
_________________________________________________
Remove _XYZ from my address when replying by mail

I love it when everyone agrees like this :)


--
Stijn
OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com
http://OddesE.cjb.net
_________________________________________________
Remove _XYZ from my address when replying by mail

"OddesE" <OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a8phk0$1o23$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Because I like it's drag-and-drop form editing
> capabilities and the object inspector etc. more  :)
> This is what sets Delphi apart from the crowd.
> Visual Studio also has code completion (although it's
> a little buggy), but it's drag and drop form editing
> comes nowhere near that of Delphi! It's improved
> (read: More like Delphi) in .net though!  ;)

Drag'n'drop rulez. Code completion rulez too. D&D + CodeCompletion =
Delphi (or C++Builder for us C++ fans). Conclusion: Delphi
(C++Builder) rulez.

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:a8po2b$25nj$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "OddesE" <OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a8phk0$1o23$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > Because I like it's drag-and-drop form editing
> > capabilities and the object inspector etc. more  :)
> > This is what sets Delphi apart from the crowd.
> > Visual Studio also has code completion (although it's
> > a little buggy), but it's drag and drop form editing
> > comes nowhere near that of Delphi! It's improved
> > (read: More like Delphi) in .net though!  ;)
>
> Drag'n'drop rulez. Code completion rulez too. D&D + CodeCompletion =
> Delphi (or C++Builder for us C++ fans). Conclusion: Delphi
> (C++Builder) rulez.
>

Yep! :)

On that note, is there something like the Delphi
'published' keyword in D?
For people not used to programming in Delphi:
In addition to private, protected and public
Delphi introduces the keyword published
to declare that a variable may be edited from
the object inspector at design-time. This is
a very cool feature of Delphi IMHO.


--
Stijn
OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com
http://OddesE.cjb.net
_________________________________________________
Remove _XYZ from my address when replying by mail


--
Stijn
OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com
http://OddesE.cjb.net
_________________________________________________
Remove _XYZ from my address when replying by mail

"OddesE" <OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a8q0sk$2k82$1@digitaldaemon.com...

> On that note, is there something like the Delphi 'published' keyword in D?

No. But I was thinking of asking Walter to add it. =)

> For people not used to programming in Delphi:
> In addition to private, protected and public
> Delphi introduces the keyword published
> to declare that a variable may be edited from
> the object inspector at design-time. This is
> a very cool feature of Delphi IMHO.

Well, actually its meaning is a bit different - it said that the member - function or variable - must be included into the RTTI members table for that class. Since it doesn't make sence to include all members of the class into the table, thus bloating the executable heavily, you just mark those variables as "accessable via RTTI" explicitly.

And then Object Inspector looks at the table of members
of the class, and displays those found there...

"Pavel Minayev" <evilone@omen.ru> wrote in message news:a8q2gf$2lt9$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> "OddesE" <OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a8q0sk$2k82$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> > On that note, is there something like the Delphi 'published' keyword in D?
>
> No. But I was thinking of asking Walter to add it. =)
>

:)

> > For people not used to programming in Delphi:
> > In addition to private, protected and public
> > Delphi introduces the keyword published
> > to declare that a variable may be edited from
> > the object inspector at design-time. This is
> > a very cool feature of Delphi IMHO.
>
> Well, actually its meaning is a bit different - it said that the member - function or variable - must be included into the RTTI members table for that class. Since it doesn't make sence to include all members of the class into the table, thus bloating the executable heavily, you just mark those variables as "accessable via RTTI" explicitly.
>
> And then Object Inspector looks at the table of members
> of the class, and displays those found there...
>

Ah ok, thanks for explaining.


--
Stijn
OddesE_XYZ@hotmail.com
http://OddesE.cjb.net
_________________________________________________
Remove _XYZ from my address when replying by mail