On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 07:12:28PM -0600, Jonathan M Davis via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Friday, July 7, 2017 1:48:47 PM MDT Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-
> announce wrote:
> > The implicit slice is one of what I see as D's design flaws and
> > brings up a number of problems. dip1000 and similar things might be
> > able to fix the problems without changing the feature, but I won't
> > be surprised if after a couple more years, we see that implicit
> > slice get deprecated.

I'm also against implicit slicing of static arrays. It's just too
dangerous, and also interacts poorly with template functions.

> The trick is convincing Walter. The last time I brought it up with
> him, he thought that improvements to @safe would fix the problem - and
> they will help - but it interacts badly with templated code, and I
> think that from a code clarity standpoint, the slicing needs to be
> explicit. So, I'm of the opinion that implicit slicing should simply
> be deprecated regardless of the state of @safe, but I don't know how
> possible it is to convince Walter of that. Fixing the @safe issues is
> at least a start though.

It's true that fixing @safe issues will at least reduce the problem
surface of implicit slicing. But it's like bandaid over a festering
wound; the problem is still there, it just lurks in more obscure corners


If the comments and the code disagree, it's likely that *both* are wrong. -- 

Reply via email to