To me it seems odd that we have a static if but no static while or static for or static foreach.

Basicly all a static loop would do is unroll itself at compile time. The only reason I want this is that currently it is impossible to use a loop variable in any sort of complietime expression such as a static if or a template instantiation.

Was/is something like this planned? Is there a way to get similar functionality now? So far the only way I have found to insert loop variables into a compile time expression is to use a side function to do looping and generate a string for mixins, which is very very very ugly, am I missing somthing?


I saw one thread from 2004 about the same thing with very little replies...
http://forum.dlang.org/thread/c7hjcc$2hph$1@digitaldaemon.com

[Edit]
Ok before I posted this, I did a few more tests and it seems like foreach has this capability somewhat, which is just confusing. Using foreach on a tuple causes it to be evaluated at compile time, which is nice but confusing. Come to think of it, I don't know how you would loop over tuples otherwise...

Tofu Ninja:

> To me it seems odd that we have a static if but no static while or static for or static foreach.

See:
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4085

Bye,
bearophile

On Saturday, 15 February 2014 at 09:09:59 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Tofu Ninja:
>
>> To me it seems odd that we have a static if but no static while or static for or static foreach.
>
> See:
> https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4085
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

I am glad to see that I am not the only one who is thinking about this. I feel like if foreach on a tuple required static in front of it, it would be much more obvious what was happening. I don't really use tuples that often so when I saw foreach on tuples, it didn't really make sense to me.

On 02/15/2014 12:20 PM, Tofu Ninja wrote:
> ...
>
> I am glad to see that I am not the only one who is thinking about this.
> I feel like if foreach on a tuple required static in front of it, it
> would be much more obvious what was happening.  ...

`static foreach' should not introduce a new scope for its body. (but foreach over a tuple should.)