Hi,

It seems that constructors has a return type. The class Good below compiles, but Bad does not.:

    /*
    class Bad
    {
        this()
        {
            return; // causes "return value expected"
        }
    }
    */

    class Good
    {
        this()
        {
            return this; // compiles fine
        }
    }


It can't be right, can it?

Regards,
Martin M. Pedersen

I'll  have to think about that one!

"Martin M. Pedersen" <mmp@www.moeller-pedersen.dk> wrote in message news:aedpad$rma$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Hi,
>
> It seems that constructors has a return type. The class Good below
compiles,
> but Bad does not.:
>
>     /*
>     class Bad
>     {
>         this()
>         {
>             return; // causes "return value expected"
>         }
>     }
>     */
>
>     class Good
>     {
>         this()
>         {
>             return this; // compiles fine
>         }
>     }
>
>
> It can't be right, can it?
>
> Regards,
> Martin M. Pedersen
>
>
>
>
>
>

Could be an interesting way to do a kind of "operator new".

I've toyed with that and so far nothing has turned up that looked good.  But it has potential.

Sean

"Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:aeelqn$1mk7$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> I'll  have to think about that one!
>
> "Martin M. Pedersen" <mmp@www.moeller-pedersen.dk> wrote in message news:aedpad$rma$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> > Hi,
> >
> > It seems that constructors has a return type. The class Good below
> compiles,
> > but Bad does not.:
> >
> >     /*
> >     class Bad
> >     {
> >         this()
> >         {
> >             return; // causes "return value expected"
> >         }
> >     }
> >     */
> >
> >     class Good
> >     {
> >         this()
> >         {
> >             return this; // compiles fine
> >         }
> >     }
> >
> >
> > It can't be right, can it?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Martin M. Pedersen