| Thread overview | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
May 18, 2013 Should AliasThis allow implicit conversion to the subtype AliasThis aliases to? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
I found out about AliasThis on the IRC, and it's pretty neat. I've got a suggestion for it however: Assigning a value to a class/struct which has aliased a member to this would forward the assignment to that member.
For instance:
----
struct IntPair {
private int _pair;
int left() { return _pair[0]; }
int right() { return _pair[1]; }
}
IntPair a = [1, 2]; // _pair = [1, 2]
IntPair b;
b.left(); //0
b = [3, 4];
b.left(); //3
----
Thoughts? I think it'd be very useful for defining types that look and act like built in primitives, but can have arbitrary methods and operator overloads attached to them.
Thanks to <jA_cOp> for bringing up AliasThis in IRC :-)
| ||||
May 18, 2013 Re: Should AliasThis allow implicit conversion to the subtype AliasThis aliases to? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dylan Knutson | Oh this is embarrassing; On Saturday, 18 May 2013 at 07:43:57 UTC, Dylan Knutson wrote: > private int _pair; should be > private int[2] _pair; | |||
May 18, 2013 Re: Should AliasThis allow implicit conversion to the subtype AliasThis aliases to? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dylan Knutson | oh my; one more typo (I really wish these forums had edit functionality)
struct definition:
----
struct IntPair {
private int[] _pair;
int left() { return _pair[0]; }
int right() { return _pair[1]; }
alias _pair this;
}
----
| |||
May 18, 2013 Re: Should AliasThis allow implicit conversion to the subtype AliasThis aliases to? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Dylan Knutson | On Saturday, 18 May 2013 at 07:43:57 UTC, Dylan Knutson wrote:
> I found out about AliasThis on the IRC, and it's pretty neat. I've got a suggestion for it however: Assigning a value to a class/struct which has aliased a member to this would forward the assignment to that member.
>
> For instance:
>
> ----
> struct IntPair {
> private int _pair;
> int left() { return _pair[0]; }
> int right() { return _pair[1]; }
> }
>
> IntPair a = [1, 2]; // _pair = [1, 2]
> IntPair b;
> b.left(); //0
> b = [3, 4];
> b.left(); //3
> ----
>
> Thoughts? I think it'd be very useful for defining types that look and act like built in primitives, but can have arbitrary methods and operator overloads attached to them.
>
> Thanks to <jA_cOp> for bringing up AliasThis in IRC :-)
Just overload assignment operator for that.
int[2] opBinary(string op)(int[2] rhs) if (op == "=") {
_pair = rhs;
return rhs;
}
| |||
May 18, 2013 Re: Should AliasThis allow implicit conversion to the subtype AliasThis aliases to? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Aleksandar Ruzicic |
>
> int[2] opBinary(string op)(int[2] rhs) if (op == "=") {
> _pair = rhs;
> return rhs;
> }
Oops, that should be IntPair opAssign(int[2] rhs)
| |||
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation
Permalink
Reply