http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6722


Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |rejects-valid
                 CC|                            |s...@iname.com
           Platform|Other                       |All
         OS/Version|Linux                       |All


--- Comment #2 from Stewart Gordon <s...@iname.com> 2012-02-12 12:35:58 PST ---
A char[] can be safely compared with an immutable(char)[], so the code should
be valid.

Putting a value into an AA is another matter though.

(In reply to comment #1)
> The simplest solution is to just make it so that it's illegal to 
> declare an AA with a key which isn't either a value type or 
> immutable

Agreed.

> and make it so that _all_ functions or operators which take the key 
> must take a type which is implicitly convertible to the key type 
> (including its immutability).

For functions that put data into an AA, yes.

For lookup functions (retrieval and removal), it should be sufficient that it's
a type that is implicitly convertible to the const version of the key type. 
(Just having an == operator with the key type isn't sufficient, as it needs to
check the hash first.)

For foreach, the only requirement should be that the key variable is of a type
to which the key type can be implicitly converted.

But this is a distinct matter from this bug.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to