http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3813
Denis Derman <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #9 from Denis Derman <[email protected]> 2010-12-16 00:13:28 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) > Sorry, the expected results are wrong because writeln() can't see TypeTuple > items as inside a collection, so the expected output is: > > > ["10", "20"] > [10, 20] > 579 > 10207 > Tuple!(int,string)(10, "20") > > > And the possible alternative output is: > > ["10", "20"] > [10, 20] > ['5', '7', '9'] > 10207 > Tuple!(int, string)(10, "20") I support this enhancement request. About char[], I think using a string format rather than an array format is better, to respect the semantics of "char" (as opposed to ubyte[]). Especially for debugging: char[] is often used temporarily to manipulate a string, thus we want to be able to (visually) compare it to a string. Denis -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
