Re: Re: myWishList

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Tom Kaitchuck said:
 > I think that it is confusing that it is not declared in a similar syntax
 > to how it was called. I would expect that if it was declared
 > toInt(Object this) { ... }
 > you would call it like
 > toInt(something);

You can call it like that.

 > Which of course would be confusing because it makes it look like it
 > belongs to the current class.

Nice doesn't assume the current class for method calls so such a call
would always be prefixed by 'this.'

 > What is the ()-> and ()=> supposed to convey? Is this syntax  necessary?

()->  is the start of a function *type* which takes no parameters

()=>  is the start of a function *creation statement* indicating that
      the function to be built takes no parameters

 > If anonymous functions are good for situations other that what I
 > described, it might be a good idea to get some examples up on the wiki.

One that I've used is a reusable try-and-recover wrapper of the form:

T onMismatch(()->T action,
             MismatchException->T recover) {

  rememberState();
  try {
    action();
  } catch (SpecialHandlingRequiredMismatchException e) {
    restoreState();
    doSpecialStuff(e);
    recover(e);
  } catch (MismatchException e) {
    restoreState();
    recover(e);
  }
}

 > Some of the concepts that Nice has that most other languages don't are
 > shared by the D programming language. It might be a good idea if we used
 > the same names for them. (And if it fits Nice's style, maybe share a
 > similar syntax)

I assume you're referring to http://www.digitalmars.com/d/

I haven't read further but at least they share an ancestor in C

Rohan



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click