Better C – A subset of D Programming Language

Post by lostmsu » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 4:41 PM UTC

arunc wrote: post #76

F-0X wrote: post #3

One thing that really annoyed me about D is that its documentation lists basically every function with an 'auto' return type. Auto should be completely banned from documentation, it's a complete hindrance. It's the single biggest contributor to why I stopped using D for personal projects - I was so tired of having to hunt down what functions are going to return, sometimes having to resort to just using it and looking…

Vim vs emacs, auto inference vs explicit, I don't think it will ever end. :)

Post by pjmlp » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 4:45 PM UTC

thesuperbigfrog wrote: post #196

pjmlp wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

C++20 almost got them. There are some Java annotation processors that rewrite the bytecode for contracts. As extra info.

Java annotations have always struck me as interesting since they fill the Lisp macros and C preprocessor niche for Java. It's another layer of complexity, but it extends the language to offer a bit more richness or layers of abstraction. I would not be surprised if a future C++ standard adds contracts officially. Boost seems to already have contracts: https://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_67_0/libs/contract/doc/html...

Post by RandallBrown » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 4:59 PM UTC

lumberjackstian wrote: post #182

F-0X wrote: post #3

One thing that really annoyed me about D is that its documentation lists basically every function with an 'auto' return type. Auto should be completely banned from documentation, it's a complete hindrance. It's the single biggest contributor to why I stopped using D for personal projects - I was so tired of having to hunt down what functions are going to return, sometimes having to resort to just using it and looking…

I've felt this as well, been using D for a couple years now, and this is the kind of thing that just makes me have to context switch more than I'd like. With the current implementation of the language it's hard to avoid, and function's return type can be quite complex, so writing it down can be hard. Another reason is the (ironically) dynamic nature of a return type. E.g. auto whatDoesItReturn(int i)() { static if (i…

Post by jcelerier » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

asdkjh345fd wrote: post #199

jhoechtl wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Repeating the same over and over again doesn't make it any clearer for the ones trying to follow your line of argumentation. Seems like you had some deep exposure to Haskell, ML or Hindley-Milner in general which, when excessively consumed, detaches from reality. For one reason or the other you take this discussion serious and personal.

If something is unclear, you can ask for clarification. I repeated the statement to three people because three people repeated the same argument to me. This is how conversations work. I have very limited exposure to haskell, am not detached from reality, and am taking nothing personal. Of course the discussion is serious, why would I spend time engaging in a frivolous and meaningless discussion?

    auto map(auto x) { 
      if constexpr(is_same) {
       struct T1 { int getStuff() { return 0; } };
       return T1 {};
      } else { 
       struct T2 { void doStuff() { } };
       return T2 {};
      }
    }

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 5:06 PM UTC