http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3813


Denis Derman <denis.s...@gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |denis.s...@gmail.com


--- Comment #9 from Denis Derman <denis.s...@gmail.com> 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: -------

Reply via email to