Thread overview | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
July 17, 2013 Feature idea: .userinit property (or trait) to retrieve the initializer of a variable | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
I often need to re-initialize a variable back to its user-defined initializer. For variables that have no user-defined initializer, you can simply use .init. For fields of structs or classes you can actually use A.init.field, where A is the aggregate type. For example: ----- struct S { int value = 5; } void main() { S s; s.value += 1; s.value = S.init.value; assert(s.value == 5); // ok } ----- But there's no equivalent for variables which do not belong to any aggregate: ----- void main() { int value = 5; value += 1; // value = ?? assert(value == 5); } ----- One workaround is to factor out the initializer to a manifest constant, for example: ----- void main() { enum valueInit = 5; int value = valueInit; value += 1; value = valueInit; assert(value == 5); } ----- It's a workable solution, but I think we can do better. I'd like us to introduce either a .userinit property, or a compiler trait. For example: ----- template userinit(alias symbol) { enum userinit = __traits(getSymbolInitializer, symbol); } void main() { int value = 5; value += 1; value = userinit!value; assert(value == 5); } ----- The trait version is less intrusive to the language than a .userinit property, although the latter would avoid having to instantiate a template: ----- void main() { int value = 5; value += 1; value = value.userinit; assert(value == 5); } ----- Anyway, I think the feature should be fairly easy to implement, but would anyone else have a use for this? |
July 17, 2013 Re: Feature idea: .userinit property (or trait) to retrieve the initializer of a variable | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrej Mitrovic | On Wednesday, 17 July 2013 at 11:28:18 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > I often need to re-initialize a variable back to its user-defined > initializer. For variables that have no user-defined initializer, you > can simply use .init. For fields of structs or classes you can > actually use A.init.field, where A is the aggregate type. For example: > > ----- > struct S > { > int value = 5; > } > > void main() > { > S s; > s.value += 1; > s.value = S.init.value; > assert(s.value == 5); // ok > } > ----- > > But there's no equivalent for variables which do not belong to any aggregate: > > ----- > void main() > { > int value = 5; > value += 1; > // value = ?? > assert(value == 5); > } > ----- I think this is not a fair comparison. Your S s could be S s = S(2) and you cannot retrieve S(2) just like in case with int value = 5. I see no difference between basic type variables and user-defined variables here. Also, this reminds me replacing typedef by alias with loosing one nice feature - you could do typedef MyInt int = 5; but not with alias. > One workaround is to factor out the initializer to a manifest > constant, for example: Other approach is to use UDA, it may be better then enum, but one still need extra typing. Having new trait seems to be a good idea but it needs to be figured out how it behaves in different contexts. |
July 17, 2013 Re: Feature idea: .userinit property (or trait) to retrieve the initializer of a variable | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Maxim Fomin | On 7/17/13, Maxim Fomin <maxim@maxim-fomin.ru> wrote:
> I think this is not a fair comparison. Your S s could be S s = S(2) and you cannot retrieve S(2) just like in case with int value = 5. I see no difference between basic type variables and user-defined variables here.
It wasn't meant to be a comparison, but a showcase that we already have /some/ form of retrieving the initializer, but I want to expand this for all variables and not just fields of aggregates.
|
July 17, 2013 Re: Feature idea: .userinit property (or trait) to retrieve the initializer of a variable | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Andrej Mitrovic | On Wednesday, 17 July 2013 at 11:28:18 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> Anyway, I think the feature should be fairly easy to implement, but
> would anyone else have a use for this?
At least once I wanted to reset a variable to its default value (which wasn't in a manifest constant).
Would it make sense to [ab]use the "default" keyword for this, to avoid introducing a new property which might collide with existing code?
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation