This page is no longer maintained — Please continue to the home page at www.scala-lang.org

Re: merging scala-virtualized into trunk, hidden behind -Yvirtualize

1 reply
adriaanm
Joined: 2010-02-08,
User offline. Last seen 31 weeks 4 days ago.
nothing is set in stone, so this is the perfect time to send us your wishlist :-)

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Erik Osheim <erik [at] plastic-idolatry [dot] com> wrote:
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 07:04:33PM +0100, Adriaan Moors wrote:
> You didn't miss anything. Infix methods are unlikely to become an
> official feature; they should be superseded by inlined implicit
> classes.

Is there documentation about how inlined implicit classes will work?
I'm hoping it means something like:

 a + b --> new GenericOps(a).+(b) --> GenericOps.+(a, b)

Would inlined implicit classes avoid creating the anonymous GenericOps
object (assuming it didn't do any work in its constructor)?

d_m
Joined: 2010-11-11,
User offline. Last seen 35 weeks 2 days ago.
Re: merging scala-virtualized into trunk, hidden behind -Yvirtu

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:16:38PM +0100, Adriaan Moors wrote:
> nothing is set in stone, so this is the perfect time to send us your
> wishlist :-)

Awesome. :)

The issues I face (and the infix operator inlining solution I used) are
described in the paper I'm submitting to ScalaDays. I bet many others
are in the same situation.

Thanks,

Copyright © 2012 École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland