On Saturday, 24 April 2021 at 04:09:15 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Saturday, 24 April 2021 at 03:40:20 UTC, Jack wrote:
Can I rely on this format from fullyQualifiedName? for
example, let's say I do:
```d
enum s = fullyQualifiedName!f.split;
```
where f is a function member of a class. Can I realy that s[0]
is the module name, s[1] is the class name and s[2] the
functio name? is this standard or can the compile change that?
I've tested on dmd, does ldc or gdc do something different?
You can rely on the order, but you cannot expect any of the
names to be at a specific index. The FQN includes the symbol's
entire hierarchy. So you could have one or more package names
in front of the module name. Essentially:
{all.package.names.}moduleName.{struct/class/functionName}.symbolName
thank you Mike, having sure I can rely on the other is enough to
me
