http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8910



--- Comment #9 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> 2012-10-29 23:41:54 
PDT ---
> Frankly thats a terrible alternative. Perhaps static array specialisations are
> in order then; assuming current implementations can't be modified to suit.

So, you think that copying a static array is a good idea? Because that's what
on overload for a static array would do. And all that overload could do would
be to slice the static array and pass it to the normal overload (because static
arrays are _not_ ranges and _cannot_ be, because you can't pop any of their
elements off), which would lead to the slice being completely invalid once the
function returned, meaning that the result would be completely unsafe and
invalid. So no, that wouldn't work.

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

Reply via email to