I need an 'in' keyword that behaves like the following:

bool b = a in {"AAAA", "BB", "CCCCCC", "Lemon"};

-or-

bool b = a in CollectionObject;
b = a in ArrayObject;

Where the above statement is the same as:

bool b;

switch(a)
{
case "AAAA":
b = 1 // true!!
break;

case "BB":
b = 1;
break;

case "CCCCCC":
b = 1;
break;

case "Lemon":
b = 1;
break;

case else:
b = 0; // false!!  I refuse to use keywords imposed by the MAN!
break;
}

Maybe I use too much SQL, but 'in' used in this fashion would be nice!

See?  I'm not against ALL keywords!!  (-;

Sam wrote:
> I need an 'in' keyword that behaves like the following:
http://digitalmars.com/d/arrays.html

Brad

On Thu, 26 May 2005 18:52:52 +0000 (UTC), Sam wrote:

> I need an 'in' keyword that behaves like the following:
> 
> bool b = a in {"AAAA", "BB", "CCCCCC", "Lemon"};

int[char[]] theList;
theList["AAAA"] = 1;
theList["BB"] = 2;
theList["CCCCCC"] = 3;
theList["Lemon"] = 4;

bool b = a in theList ? true : false;


-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
27/05/2005 6:10:49 AM

Sam wrote:
> I need an 'in' keyword that behaves like the following:
> 
> bool b = a in {"AAAA", "BB", "CCCCCC", "Lemon"};
> 
> -or-
> 
> bool b = a in CollectionObject;
> b = a in ArrayObject;
> 
> Where the above statement is the same as:
> 
> bool b;
> 
> switch(a)
> {
> case "AAAA":
> b = 1 // true!!
> break;
> 
> case "BB":
> b = 1;
> break;
> 
> case "CCCCCC":
> b = 1;
> break;
> 
> case "Lemon":
> b = 1;
> break;
> 
> case else:
> b = 0; // false!!  I refuse to use keywords imposed by the MAN!
> break;
> }
> 
> Maybe I use too much SQL, but 'in' used in this fashion would be nice!
> 
> See?  I'm not against ALL keywords!!  (-;
> 
> 

There IS an "in" keyword ...
But I just don't know how to use it.

Derek Parnell wrote:
> bool b = a in theList ? true : false;

Or even just this:

# bool b = (a in theList) == null;

Except he says he doesn't like the 'null' keyword.  And I wonder, would a null pointer implicity cast to a 'false' and a valid pointer implicitly cast to a 'true'?  Then you could just do:

# bool b = a in theList;

-- Chris Sauls

On Thu, 26 May 2005 21:13:41 -0500, Chris Sauls wrote:

> Derek Parnell wrote:
>> bool b = a in theList ? true : false;

I'm quite pedantic with my bools and I don't like to implicitly convert integers to bools. Just a thing I have... ;-)

> Or even just this:
> 
> # bool b = (a in theList) == null;

Or more like this ...

 bool b = (a in theList) != null;

> Except he says he doesn't like the 'null' keyword.  And I wonder, would a null pointer implicity cast to a 'false' and a valid pointer implicitly cast to a 'true'?  Then you could just do:
> 
> # bool b = a in theList;

Nup, D is smart enough to realize that pointers are not integers so an implicit conversion doesn't fly.

Though this (ugly construct) is possible ...

 bool b = !!(a in theList);

-- 
Derek
Melbourne, Australia
27/05/2005 12:22:31 PM