http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9112
--- Comment #14 from Jonathan M Davis <[email protected]> 2012-12-07 10:57:47 PST --- > So we're introducing C++-style casts into D? This means you can no longer > search for 'cast' and expect to find all the unsafe casts in your code. I'm > very much against this, and if I remember right Walter was also against this. I'd actually argue for making it so that no explict casting is involved. It could be restricted to cases where T var = literal; and T var = T(literal); would be identical. So, stuff like ubyte(12345) would be illegal whereas cast(ubyte)12345 would be legal. It then looks like a C++ cast but isn't. It solves the problem with generic code without causing any issues you get with casts. > We can also use a library template to do it without introducing new syntax. If > orthogonality is needed because of metaprogramming then why not just implement > a template in Phobos? I tried that. Andrei rejected it, and it's not worth my time to fight him over it. Not to mention, I've always thought that auto i = new int(7); auto j = new immutable(int)(5); should be legal and think that having to do something like makeNew!int(7) is a bit of a hack anyway, since it's specifically working around a deficiency in the language. > We really don't need 10 ways of doing the same thing with a different syntax.. The whole point of this is to try and make things more consistent, not less. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
